Amyloid and tau deposition is associated with performance on tests of auditory processing in the brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology may affect sound processing (central auditory function) in the brain. This study aims to investigate the link between tests of central auditory function, such as dichotic digits, and brain pathology in older adults at high risk for developing dementia. Method 28 individuals (13 cognitively unimpaired (CU) and 15 mild cognitively impaired (MCI)) were enrolled (Table 1). Amyloid deposition was assessed with [18F] AZD4694 PET and tau accumulation was assessed with [18F]MK6240 PET. Standard uptake value ratios (SUVR) were determined using the cerebellar and the inferior cerebellar cortex as reference region for amyloid and tau PET, respectively. Hearing assessments were conducted using a custom audiological testing system from Creare LLC. Voxel‐based regression models evaluated the association between dichotic digit scores and amyloid and tau deposition as assessed by PET, adjusting for Pure Tone Average (PTA) and a control condition for speech in noise (Triple digits score). Random field theory (RFT) was used to correct for multiple comparisons. Result In the voxel‐wise analysis, negative associations between dichotic digits scores and amyloid‐PET were found in the temporal, occipital and parietal areas. Negative associations between dichotic digits scores and tau‐PET were present in the temporal area, with higher t‐values in the primary and secondary somatosensory cortices (Figure 1, panel A). Negative correlations were found between dichotic digits scores and both amyloid (p<0.001) and tau (p<0.05) SUVRs (Figure 1, panel B). In addition, dichotic digits scores were significantly lower in MCI individuals (p<0.001) (Figure 1, panel C). Conclusion This study is the first to assess associations between central auditory hearing in CU and MCI individuals using PET biomarkers. These findings highlight the link between central auditory deficits and AD hallmarks in auditory processing‐related brain regions. This suggests a potential decreased capacity for interhemispheric transfer in mildly cognitively impaired individuals.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".