MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390200524 · doi:10.1002/alz.079969

Microglial Activation Contributes to Neuropsychiatric Dysfunction in Alzheimer’s Disease

2023· article· en· W4390200524 on OpenAlexaff
Cristiano Schaffer Aguzzoli, Pâmela C.L. Ferreira, Guilherme Povala, Carolina Soares, João Pedro Ferrari‐Souza, Bruna Bellaver, Hussein Zalzale, Firoza Z Lussier, Francieli Rohden, Sarah Abbas, Peter Charles Lemaire, Douglas Teixeira Leffa, Arlec Cabrera, Joseph Therriault, Andréa Lessa Benedet, Cécile Tissot, Stijn Servaes, Arthur C. Macedo, Marie Vermeiren, Gleb Bezgin, Min Su Kang, Jenna Stevenson, Nesrine Rahmouni, Vanessa Pallen, Annie Cohen, Oscar L. López, Dana Tudorascu, William E. Klunk, Victor L. Villemagne, Nina Margherita Poltronetti, Jean‐Paul Soucy, Yi‐Ting Wang, Serge Gauthier, Diogo O. Souza, Nicholas J. Ashton, Lucas Porcello Schilling, Thomas K. Karikari, Kaj Blennow, Henrik Zetterberg, Eduardo R. Zimmer, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Tharick A. Pascoal

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApathyPrecuneusPsychologyDepression (economics)IrritabilityCohortPosterior cingulateInternal medicinePositron emission tomographyDementia with Lewy bodiesDementiaClinical psychologyDiseasePsychiatryAnxietyNeuroscienceMedicineCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Previous studies have shown that microglial activation (MA) plays a key role in the pathophysiological and clinical progressions of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, little is known whether MA is also associated with the development of neuropsychiatric symptoms typically found in patients with AD. Thus, we aim to investigate here the association of MA with neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) of individuals across the AD continuum. Method We assessed 132 individuals (86 cognitively unimpaired (CU), 28 MCI, and 18 AD dementia) from the TRIAD cohort who underwent clinical assessments with the Neuropsychiatry Inventory Questionnaire (NPI‐Q), and had positron emission tomography (PET) for amyloid‐β (Aβ) ([18F]AZD4694), tau tangles ([18F]MK6240) and MA ([11C]PBR28) at the same visit. Regions were tailored using Desikan‐Killiany (DK) atlas. SUVRs were calculated using the cerebellum gray matter as a reference. Linear regression tested the association between biomarkers accounting for age, sex, and cognitive status. Result NPI‐Q total score was significantly associated with [11C]PBR28 in the cingulate, inferior temporal, and precuneus accounting for age, sex, and after false discovery rate (FDR) correction for multiple comparisons (Figures 1A, 1B, 1C). This association was independent of Aβ and tau levels (Table 1). Notably, MA predicted neuropsychiatric dysfunction with higher magnitude than Aß or tau using PET values from overlap region (regional SUVR) and if we use a global measure for all tracers (global SUVR) (Figure 2A). When we stratify NPI‐Q domains (agitation, irritability, motor disturbance, disinhibition, elation, delusion, hallucinations, nighttime disturbance, depression, anxiety, apathy, and appetite disturbance) severity score, we found that the hyperactivity subdomain (agitation, irritability, motor disturbance, disinhibition, and elation) showed the larger contribution to the results (Figure 2B). Conclusion Our results suggest MA as a key element associated with neuropsychiatric dysfunction in AD independent of Aβ and tau pathologies. These findings provide additional rationale for the therapeutics targeting glial cells activation in AD patients.

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)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.283 · 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→