MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389871054 · doi:10.1101/2023.12.16.23300062

Towards cascading genetic risk in Alzheimer’s disease

2023· preprint· en· W4389871054 on OpenAlexfundno aff
André Altmann, Leon Aksman, Neil P. Oxtoby, Alexandra L. Young, Daniel C. Alexander, Frederik Barkhof, Maryam Shoai, John Hardy, Jonathan M. Schott

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research, Development and Innovation OfficeMedical Research CouncilMinistero della SaluteWellcome TrustAgence Nationale de la RechercheBritish Heart FoundationUniversity College LondonUK Research and InnovationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchEU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease ResearchWeston Brain InstituteZonMwBrain Research UKAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsDiseaseMedicineGeneticsBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Alzheimer’s disease typically progresses in stages, which have been defined by the presence of disease-specific biomarkers: Amyloid (A), Tau (T) and neurodegeneration (N). This progression of biomarkers has been condensed into the ATN framework, where each of the biomarkers can be either positive (+) or negative (-). Over the past decades genome wide association studies have implicated about 90 different loci involved with the development of late onset Alzheimer’s disease. Here we investigate whether genetic risk for Alzheimer’s disease contributes equally to the progression in different disease stages or whether it exhibits a stage-dependent effect. Amyloid (A) and tau (T) status was defined using a combination of available PET and CSF biomarkers in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort. In 312 participants with biomarker-confirmed A-T- status, we employed Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the contribution of APOE and polygenic risk scores (beyond APOE ) to convert to A+T- status (65 conversions). Furthermore, we repeated the analysis in 290 participants with A+T- status and investigated the genetic contribution to conversion to A+T+ (45 conversions). Both survival analyses were adjusted for age, sex, and years of education. For progression from A-T- to A+T-, APOE-e4 burden showed significant effect (HR=2.88; 95% CI: 1.70-4.89; P<0.001), while polygenic risk did not (HR=1.09; 95% CI: 0.84-1.42; P=0.53). Conversely, for the transition from A+T- to A+T+, the APOE-e4 burden contribution was reduced (HR=1.62 95% CI: 1.05-2.51; P=0.031), while the polygenic risk showed an increased contribution (HR=1.73; 95% CI:1.27-2.36; P<0.001). The marginal APOE effect was driven by e4 homozygotes (HR=2.58; 95% CI: 1.05-6.35; P=0.039) as opposed to e4 heterozygotes (HR=1.74; 95% CI: 0.87-3.49; P=0.12). The genetic risk for late-onset Alzheimer’s disease unfolds in a disease stage-dependent fashion. A better understanding of the interplay between disease stage and genetic risk can lead to a more mechanistic understanding of transition between ATN stages, a better understanding of the molecular processes leading to Alzheimer’s disease as well as opening therapeutic windows for targeted interventions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207