MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390196967 · doi:10.1002/alz.081972

Smoking History and Higher Pack Years Predict Brain Atrophy in 9646 Healthy Individuals

2023· article· en· W4390196967 on OpenAlexaff
Somayeh Meysami, Cyrus A. Raji, Sam Hashemi, Saurabh Garg, Nasrin Akbari, Thanh D. Nguyen, Ahmed Gouda, Yosef Gavriel Chodakiewitz, Sean London, David A. Merrill, Raj Attariwala

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsBC Hydro (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrophyBrain sizeFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryWhite matterNuclear medicineCoronal planeFamily historyMagnetic resonance imagingInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Smoking is a risk factor for both Alzheimer and vascular dementia. Understanding this risk requires an investigation of how smoking influences brain volume loss on MRI, a biomarker for neurodegeneration. Method In total, 9646 healthy participants from 4 sites were scanned on 1.5T MR with a whole‐body MR imaging protocol. Core whole body sequences included whole body coronal T1, STIR from vertex to feet, whole‐body axial DWI from vertex to proximal‐thighs and axial T2 TSE without fat suppression from skull base to pelvis. Brain sequences were T1 MPRAGE and 2D FLAIR. Deep learning volumetric software, FastSurfer, trained on over 134 participants age 27‐66, segmented 96 brain volumes. Smokers versus non‐smokers were compared by gray and white matter volumes normalized to total intracranial volume using a two tailed t‐test. Partial correlation analysis was done between pack years and brain volumes, controlling for age, sex, and total intracranial volume (TIV). The Benjamini Hochberg False Discovery Rate of 5% accounted for multiple comparisons. Result Overall, the sample had an average age of 52.9±13.1 years with 3123 individuals (32.3%) self‐reporting a history of smoking with 3.72±10.08 pack years. The remaining 6523 persons (67.7%) were non‐smokers. Participants who smoked were older than non‐smokers (p = 0.024) and 51.55% were men versus 52.8% in the non‐smoker group (p = .218). Individuals with a history of smoking had lower normalized gray and white matter volumes compared to non‐smokers (t = 8.95, p = 4.39e‐19). Adjusting for age, sex, and TIV co‐variates and multiple comparisons, higher pack years of smoking predicted brain volume loss in: total gray matter volume (Partial R = ‐0.06, p = 2.19e‐8), total white matter volume (Partial R = ‐0.06, p = 4.26e‐9), hippocampus (Partial R = ‐0.05, p = 6.26e‐6), frontal cortex (Partial R = ‐0.06, p = 1.34e‐10), temporal lobes (Partial R = ‐0.06, p = 3.24e‐8), parietal lobe (Partial R = ‐0.04, p = 0.0008), orbital frontal cortex (Partial R = ‐0.05, p = 2.19e‐8), posterior cingulate gyrus (Partial R = ‐0.05, p = 2.97e‐7). Conclusion Both smoking history and pack years are related to lower whole brain and regional volumes.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→