MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391660726 · doi:10.14283/jpad.2024.42

“Back to Braak”: Role of Nucleus Reuniens and Subcortical Pathways in Alzheimer's Disease Progression

2024· article· en· W4391660726 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stefano Censi, Carlo Sestieri, Miriam Punzi, Andrea Delli Pizzi, Antonio Ferretti, F. Gambi, V Tomassini, Stefano Delli Pizzi, Stefano L. Sensi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer s Disease · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerBiogenBioClinicaAlexion PharmaceuticalsUniversity of Southern CaliforniaAssociazione Italiana Ricerca AlzheimerU.S. Department of DefenseEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbSanofiMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMinistero della SaluteNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsNeuroscienceDiseaseAlzheimer's diseasePsychologyMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with Alzheimer's Disease (AD) exhibit structural alterations of the thalamus that correlate with clinical symptoms. However, given the anatomical complexity of this brain structure, it is still unclear whether atrophy affects specific thalamic nuclei and modulates the clinical progression from a prodromal stage, known as Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), to full-fledged AD. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the structural integrity of distinct thalamic nuclei across the AD spectrum, testing whether MCI patients who convert to AD (c-MCI) show a distinctive pattern of thalamic structural alterations compared to patients who remain stable (s-MCI). DESIGN: Investigating between-group differences in the volumetric features of distinct thalamic nuclei across the AD spectrum. SETTING: Prodromal and clinical stages of AD. PARTICIPANTS: We analyzed data from 84 healthy control subjects (HC), 58 individuals with MCI, and 102 AD patients. The dataset was obtained from the AD Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI-3) database. The MCI group was further divided into two subgroups depending on whether patients remained stable (s-MCI, n=22) or progressed to AD (s-MCI, n=36) in the 48 months following the diagnosis. MEASUREMENTS: A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) assessed group differences in the volumetric features of distinct thalamic nuclei obtained from magnetic resonance (MR) images. A stepwise discriminant function analysis identified which feature most effectively predicted the conversion to AD. The corresponding predictive performance was evaluated through a Receiver Operating Characteristic approach. RESULTS: AD and c-MCI patients showed generalized atrophy of thalamic nuclei compared to HC. In contrast, no significant structural differences were observed between s-MCI and HC subjects. Compared to s-MCI, c-MCI individuals displayed significant atrophy of the nucleus reuniens and a trend toward significant atrophy in the anteroventral and laterodorsal nuclei. The discriminant function analysis confirmed the nucleus reuniens as a significant predictor of AD conversion, with a sensitivity of 0.73 and a specificity of 0.69. CONCLUSIONS: In line with the pathophysiological relevance of the nucleus reuniens proposed by seminal post-mortem studies on patients with AD, we confirm the pivotal role of this nucleus as a critical hub in the clinical progression to AD. We also propose a theoretical model to explain the evolving dysfunction of subcortical brain networks in the disease process.

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)0.003
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer s Disease→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→