Mild behavioral impairment in early Alzheimer’s disease and its association with APOE and BDNF risk genetic polymorphisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mild behavioral impairment (MBI) has been commonly reported in early Alzheimer's disease (AD) but rarely using biomarker-defined samples. It is also unclear whether genetic polymorphisms influence MBI in such individuals. We thus aimed to examine the association between the cognitive status of participants (amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI-AD) vs cognitively normal (CN) older adults) and MBI severity. Within aMCI-AD, we further examined the association between APOE and BDNF risk genetic polymorphisms and MBI severity. METHODS: We included 62 aMCI-AD participants and 50 CN older adults from the Czech Brain Aging Study. The participants underwent neurological, comprehensive neuropsychological examination, APOE and BDNF genotyping, and magnetic resonance imaging. MBI was diagnosed with the Mild Behavioral Impairment Checklist (MBI-C), and the diagnosis was based on the MBI-C total score ≥ 7. Additionally, self-report instruments for anxiety (the Beck Anxiety Inventory) and depressive symptoms (the Geriatric Depression Scale-15) were administered. The participants were stratified based on the presence of at least one risk allele in genes for APOE (i.e., e4 carriers and non-carriers) and BDNF (i.e., Met carriers and non-carriers). We used linear regressions to examine the associations. RESULTS: MBI was present in 48.4% of the aMCI-AD individuals. Compared to the CN, aMCI-AD was associated with more affective, apathy, and impulse dyscontrol but not social inappropriateness or psychotic symptoms. Furthermore, aMCI-AD was related to more depressive but not anxiety symptoms on self-report measures. Within the aMCI-AD, there were no associations between APOE e4 and BDNF Met and MBI-C severity. However, a positive association between Met carriership and self-reported anxiety appeared. CONCLUSIONS: MBI is frequent in aMCI-AD and related to more severe affective, apathy, and impulse dyscontrol symptoms. APOE and BDNF polymorphisms were not associated with MBI severity separately; however, their combined effect warrants further investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".