Association of plasma biomarkers with cognitive function in persons with dementia and cognitively healthy in the Democratic Republic of Congo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Cross‐sectional and longitudinal measurements of plasma biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in Western countries are being applied in clinical practice, whereas their associations with culturally validated cognitive tests in other settings remain unknown. We aim to examine cross‐sectional association of plasma protein biomarker concentrations and APOE proteotype with cognitive function and explore the discriminative role of these AD biomarkers in such an association. Method This is a cross‐sectional retrospective study completed from 2018 to 2022 in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Subjects were recruited from clinics, hospitals, churches, and across DRC. The study started in January 2018 until December 2022. Data were analyzed from May 2022 to December 2022. The DRC Memory clinic team recruited 1430 individuals 65 years and over. Based on Community Screening Instruments for Dementia (CSID), and Alzheimer’s Questionnaire (AQ), and DSM‐5 diagnostic criteria, participants included 44 individuals classified as major neurocognitive disorder (dementia) and 41 as healthy controls (HC). Subjects underwent cognitive assessment with a validated, culturally‐tailored cognitive battery. AD plasma biomarkers (Aβ42, Aβ40, Aβ42/40, p‐tau 181), APS (derived from Aβ42/40, APOE status, and age), and APOE proteotype were utilized to assess for genetic risk. Result Individuals with dementia had significantly lower Aβ42/40 levels, higher APS, and higher APOE ε4 prevalence compared to HC. Linear regressions showed significantly associations between Aβ42/40 and APS with ANT, ALMT, and AVMT scores, while APOE ε4 presence was associated with ANT, ALMT, AVMT, and APT scores. APS showed the highest AUC value (AUC = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.68‐0.88) followed by Aβ42/40 (AUC = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66‐0.86) and APOE ε4 (AUC = 0.69 (CI 0.57‐0.81) in discriminating dementia from HC. Conclusion Select AD biomarkers were associated with cognition and differentiated dementia from HC, consistent with extant research. These findings may have implications for the assessment of AD biomarkers in DRC.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".