MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390194331 · doi:10.1002/alz.078421

Astrocyte reactivity potentiates longitudinal tau tangle accumulation in cognitively unimpaired individuals

2023· article· en· W4390194331 on OpenAlexaff
Bruna Bellaver, Guilherme Povala, Pâmela C.L. Ferreira, João Pedro Ferrari‐Souza, Douglas Teixeira Leffa, Firoza Z Lussier, Hussein Zalzale, Carolina Soares, Cristiano Schaffer Aguzzoli, Francieli Rohden, Sarah Abbas, Nicholas J. Ashton, Cécile Tissot, Joseph Therriault, Stijn Servaes, Jenna Stevenson, Nesrine Rahmouni, Oscar L. López, Dana Tudorascu, Victor L. Villemagne, Miloš D. Ikonomović, William E. Klunk, Ann D. Cohen, Serge Gauthier, Eduardo R. Zimmer, Henrik Zetterberg, Kaj Blennow, Thomas K. Karikari, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Tharick A. Pascoal

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAstrocyteGlial fibrillary acidic proteinPsychologyCohortPathologyLongitudinal studyNeuroscienceMedicineInternal medicineCentral nervous systemImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Aβ accumulation precedes tau pathology in cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals, which is an event closely related to the development of cognitive symptoms. However, Aβ leads to tau pathology in some individuals, but not in others, suggesting the presence of other processes triggering the deleterious effects of Aβ in the early Alzheimer’s disease (AD) stages. It was already demonstrated that glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP)‐positive astrocytes can internalize tau and might contribute to its propagation. Here we investigated whether astrocyte reactivity is a key element to determining the longitudinal accumulation and spreading of tau pathology in CU individuals. Method We assessed 147 CU individuals from the TRIAD cohort with available baseline Aβ‐ and Tau‐PET, plasma p‐tau181 and GFAP. Individuals were classified as positive (Ast+) or negative (Ast‐) for astrocyte reactivity using a cutoff based on plasma GFAP levels of younger Aβ‐ individuals. Longitudinal analysis included 71 CU individuals with Tau‐PET (mean follow‐up:2.3 years).Voxel‐wise associations between biomarkers were tested using linear regressions accounting for age, sex, and adjusting for multiple comparisons. We measured the annual rate of progression in Tau uptake as the difference between follow‐up and baseline uptakes divided by the time between scans. To assess individuals’ percentage of abnormal regions, we used composite brain regions corresponding to Braak histopathological stages. Result Tau‐PET deposition occurred as a function of Aβ burden only in CU Ast+ and in regions expected to present the earliest tau deposition (Fig.1a). In the longitudinal analysis, we observed that the annual rate of tau‐PET accumulation was higher in the CU Ast+ group (Fig.2a) and predicted by baseline Aβ burden only in CU Ast+ (Fig.2b). Interestingly, while the baseline association was confined to the mesial temporal cortex, the longitudinal tau‐PET accumulation as a function of Aβ/Ast presented initial tau spread over the neocortex in Braak III‐IV regions (Fig.2c). Conclusion We observed that Tau‐PET accumulation was highest in CU Ast+ individuals, with astrocyte reactivity being necessary for the spreading of tau over the neocortex. Our findings suggest that astrocyte reactivity is an important upstream event to unleash tau accumulation and spread in CU individuals, which might have implications for selecting individuals for early preventive clinical trials.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.265 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments→French-language works237,207→