MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390195329 · doi:10.1002/alz.078070

Plasma p‐tau and brain‐derived total tau biomarkers predict longitudinal changes in Aβ, tau, and cognition across the AD continuum

2023· article· en· W4390195329 on OpenAlexaff
Pâmela C.L. Ferreira, Bruna Bellaver, Guilherme Povala, Juan Lantero‐Rodriguez, Anniina Snellman, Douglas Teixeira Leffa, Pedro Ferrari‐Souza, Firoza Z Lussier, Hussein Zalzale, Carolina Soares, Cristiano Schaffer Aguzzoli, Cécile Tissot, Andréa Lessa Benedet, Francieli Rohden, Joseph Therriault, Sarah Abbas, Gleb Bezgin, Stijn Servaes, Oscar L. López, Nesrine Rahmouni, Dana Tudorascu, William E. Klunk, Victor L. Villemagne, Ann D. Cohen, Serge Gauthier, Eduardo R. Zimmer, Thomas K. Karikari, Nicholas J. Ashton, Henrik Zetterberg, Kaj Blennow, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Tharick A. Pascoal

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical Dementia RatingCohortInternal medicinePsychologyDementiaLongitudinal studyPathophysiologyTau proteinAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeGlial fibrillary acidic proteinMedicineOncologyAlzheimer's diseasePathologyDiseaseImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Recent studies have suggested that plasma p‐tau biomarkers are associated with cross‐sectional brain amyloid(Aβ) rather than tau tangle pathology. However, it is still unclear if plasma tau biomarkers are closely related to changes in AD pathophysiology over time. In this work, we aimed to determine if cross‐sectional measures of plasma tau biomarkers are associated with longitudinal changes in Aβ‐PET, tau‐PET, and cognition across the AD spectrum. Method We evaluated 157 individuals(96 cognitively unimpaired(CU) and 61 cognitively impaired (CI)) with available baseline measures of plasma Aβ42/40, p‐tau(at threonine 181, 217+, and 231), N‐terminal tau fragments(NTA, a new brain derived tau marker), and glial fibrillary acidic protein(GFAP) and with longitudinal [18F]AZD4694 Aβ‐PET, [18F]MK6340 tau‐PET and Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes(CDR‐SB) score from the TRIAD cohort. We also included 321(118 CU and 203 CI) individuals from the ADNI cohort with baseline plasma p‐tau181 and [18F]florbetapir Aβ‐PET and longitudinal CDR‐SB. Using linear regressions adjusted for age and sex we tested the associations between plasma biomarkers and longitudinal changes in Aβ‐PET, tau‐PET, and CDR‐SB. Result In CU, changes in tau‐PET were significantly associated only with plasma p‐tau217+(β = 0.331, p<0.01,Figure1A). Changes in Aβ‐PET were significantly associated with p‐tau181(β = 0.594, p<0.01,Figure2A), p‐tau217+(β = 0.311, p = 0.02) and NTA(β = 0.435, p<0.01), while no plasma biomarker was associated with changes in cognition in CU(Figure3A). In CI, changes in tau‐PET were significantly associated with plasma p‐tau181(β = ‐0.338, p = 0.03,Figure1B) and NTA(β = ‐0.379, p = 0.03), while no plasma biomarker was significantly associated with changes in Aβ‐PET. Changes in cognition were significantly associated with plasma p‐tau181(β = 0.340, p = 0.01, Figure3B), p‐tau217+(β = 0.54, p<0.01), and NTA(β = 0.530, p<0.01). Similarly, in the ADNI cohort, plasma p‐tau181 was associated with longitudinal changes in cognition in CI (β = 0.247, p<0.01,Figure3D). Conclusion We demonstrate that cross‐sectional measures of plasma p‐tau and NTA biomarkers were associated with longitudinal Aβ deposition and tau accumulation in CU, while in CI they were only associated with tau accumulation. Interestingly, plasma tau biomarkers were also associated with changes in cognition in CI individuals. The fact that abnormal levels of plasma tau biomarkers are associated with longitudinal changes in AD pathophysiology has implications for the use of these markers in clinical trials and practice.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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