MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390199146 · doi:10.1002/alz.074200

Day‐to‐day Sleep Variability in Val66Met BDNF Carriers: A Potential Biological Pathway Between BDNF Activity and Alzheimer’s Disease Pathology?

2023· article· en· W4390199146 on OpenAlexaff
Andrée‐Ann Baril, Cynthia Picard, Anne Labonté, Erlan Sanchez, Béry Mohammediyan, Catherine Duclos, John C.S. Breitner, Sylvia Villeneuve, Judes Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalSunnybrook HospitalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActigraphyrs6265Internal medicineMedicineBrain-derived neurotrophic factorCohortOncologyDementiaCognitive declineSleep disorderPsychologyDiseaseNeurotrophic factorsEndocrinologyCircadian rhythmCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background We previously showed that day‐to‐day sleep variability was associated with biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. Given that brain‐derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) activity has been involved in both AD and cognitive impacts of lifestyle risk factors, we sought to evaluate day‐to‐day sleep variability in those carrying the Met allele of the Val66Met BDNF polymorphism, which affects BDNF release. Additionally, we explored whether BDNF polymorphism modified the association between CSF AD pathology and day‐to‐day sleep variability. Method The PREVENT‐AD cohort enrolls dementia‐free persons with a parental history of sporadic AD. We characterized 203 dementia‐free participants from this cohort at the polymorphic BDNF locus, identifying 136 persons with genotype Val/Val (age 68.2±5.3y, 75%women), 67 Met heterozygotes/homozygotes (68.4±5.6y, 73% women, including six Met/Met homozygotes). After a week of actigraphy, we calculated these participants’ standard deviation of day‐to‐day sleep characteristics. We used t‐tests to compare day‐to‐day sleep variability in sleep characteristics between Val homozygotes and Met carriers. In a subsample of 101 participants, we assayed CSF Aβ42, t‐tau and p‐tau181, and used age‐ and sex‐adjusted linear regressions with an interaction term to test for moderation by BDNF genotype (36 Met carriers vs. 65 Val homozygotes) between sleep variability and CSF biomarker results. Result As compared to Val homozygotes, sleep was disturbed and unstable in BDNF Met carriers (heterozygotes/homozygotes). They had higher day‐to‐day variability in sleep fragmentation (activity counts, wake after sleep onset, fragmentation index), sleep onset latency, and sleep duration, resulting in weekly sleep patterns that were more fragmented and less efficient. Further, BDNF genotype moderated the association between CSF t‐tau and p‐tau181 with day‐to‐day sleep duration variability, such that only Met carriers showed an association between elevated tau concentration and sleep duration variability. Conclusion BDNF Met carriers had disturbed and unstable daily sleep patterns. Because the Met allele is known to decrease plasticity of neural mechanisms, the ability to achieve healthy and stable sleep may depend on such mechanisms. Thus, poorer sleep in Met carriers might be a biological mechanism by which altered BDNF activity affects tau pathology or, alternatively, accumulated AD pathology in Met carriers may disrupt sleep‐wake patterns.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 topicSleep and Wakefulness Research→French-language works237,207→