MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390200506 · doi:10.1002/alz.078267

Sex and family history differences in Aβ and tau vulnerability in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease

2023· article· en· W4390200506 on OpenAlexaff
Valentin Ourry, Frédéric St‐Onge, Béry Mohammediyan, Yara Yakoub, Jean‐Paul Soucy, Judes Poirier, John C.S. Breitner, Sylvia Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill Genome CentreMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohortMedicineDemographyDiseaseFamily historyPsychologyInternal medicineOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Females and individuals with a family history (FH) of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are considered at higher risk of sporadic AD. However, how sex and maternal/paternal heredity affects in vivo AD biomarkers is not well understood. Our objectives were to 1) assess if females or individuals with a first‐degree maternal FH of AD accumulate amyloid‐beta (Aβ) and/or tau faster than males or individuals with a first‐degree paternal FH of AD and 2) assess if both could influence the rate of Aβ driving tau in preclinical AD. Method Two hundred and thirty‐five older adults (age 68.3 ± 5.1 years, 69.8% female) from the PREVENT‐AD cohort, cognitively unimpaired at baseline, underwent [18F]‐NAV4694 and [18F]‐AV1451 positron emission tomography (PET) scans. Longitudinal PET scans were available for 106 individuals (4.3 ± 0.4 years follow‐up). We extracted and averaged the standard uptake value ratio (SUVr) in fronto‐parietal regions for Aβ and in temporal regions for tau. We performed t‐tests and ANOVA models to assess sex or maternal/paternal FH (FHsex) differences in Aβ and tau burden or annual change. We then performed linear regression models with an interaction term between Aβ and sex (or Aβ and FHsex) on tau burden and annual change, plus additional models to adjust for age and education. Result Sex and FHsex differences on Aβ and tau burden or annual rate of change did not reach significance although females tended to have higher tau SUVr at baseline (p = 0.053) (Figure 1 & 2). We found an interaction between Aβ and sex (𝛽 = ‐0.13, p = 0.008), and between Aβ and FHsex (𝛽 = 0.11, p = 0.03), on tau at baseline (Figure 3) suggesting that, for the same level of Aβ burden, females and individuals with paternal FH of AD had higher tau burden than males and individuals with maternal FH of AD. Results were similar when adjusted for age and education. Conclusion Females and individuals with a paternal FH of AD might need less Aβ before developing AD‐related tau, but did not accumulate tau faster. Identifying individuals more vulnerable to AD pathology, by disentangling sex‐specific effects, would help to design personalized interventions for AD.

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→