Plasma p‐tau181 levels in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The fundamental pathological process in AD involves amyloid(Aβ) deposition and Tau hyperphosphorylation (ptau). Plasma ptau has been proven as more accessible and less invasive biomarker than CSF for the assessment of AD pathological features. DLB is another common cause of dementia in the elderly and has overlapping features with AD. Thus, the detection of Alzheimer’s biomarkers might be useful for distinguishing the underlying pathology of AD from other concurrent pathologic processes. In this study, we compared the plasma levels of p‐tau181 in patients with clinically diagnosed DLB and AD. Method We examined EDTA plasma samples of patients assessed at the UBC Hospital Clinic for AD. The cohort was clinically characterized as control (n = 89) if no significant cognitive impairment was found, AD (n = 195) if they fulfill the NIA‐AA criteria (McKhann 2011), and DLB (n = 39) if they fulfill the consensus criteria for DLB (McKeith 2005; McKeith 2017). The samples were analyzed by a p‐tau181‐specific Simoa assay. Result The mean age of the cohort is 69.2 ± 10.3 with the control 63.4 ± 8.7, AD 70.1 ±9.9 and DLB 77.8 ± 8. There are 74.2% females in the controls, 52.8% in AD, and 35.9% in DLB.). The patients with DLB were older than the cases of AD and controls (p<0.001) and there was no significant effect of age on plasma ptau‐181 concentrations (p = 0.65). There were more females in the controls and AD groups compared to DLB (p<0.001), however, there was no significant correlation between sex and plasma ptau‐181 (p = 0.24). While the plasma p‐tau181 concentrations of cases with AD (74.1 ± 35.6 pg/ml) were slightly higher than DLB (73.2 ± 44.4 pg/ml), they were not significantly different. However, they were significantly higher than the control group (26.5 ± 23 pg/ml) (p < 0.001). Conclusion In current study, plasma p‐tau181 levels did not differentiate the DLB group from the AD, but both groups were significantly higher than controls. This suggests that DLB often have co‐existing AD pathology, making their p‐tau measurements like the AD group. Further studies with autopsy‐defined samples will be needed to clarify the role of plasma p‐tau181 in DLB.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".