Comparative analysis of multimodal biomarkers for amyloid-beta positivity detection in Alzheimer's disease cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Efforts to develop cost-effective approaches for detecting amyloid pathology in Alzheimer's disease (AD) have gained significant momentum with a focus on biomarker classification. Recent research has explored non-invasive and readily accessible biomarkers, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) biomarkers and some AD risk factors. Methods: In this comprehensive study, we leveraged a diverse dataset, encompassing participants with varying cognitive statuses from multiple sources, including cohorts from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and our in-house Dementia Disease Initiation (DDI) cohort. As brain amyloid plaques have been proposed as sufficient for AD diagnosis, our primary aim was to assess the effectiveness of multimodal biomarkers in identifying amyloid plaques, using deep machine learning methodologies. Results: Our findings underscore the robustness of the utilized methods in detecting amyloid beta positivity across multiple cohorts. Additionally, we investigated the potential of demographic data to enhance MRI-based amyloid detection. Notably, the inclusion of demographic risk factors significantly improved our models' ability to detect amyloid-beta positivity, particularly in early-stage cases, exemplified by an average area under the ROC curve of 0.836 in the unimpaired DDI cohort. Discussion: These promising, non-invasive, and cost-effective predictors of MRI biomarkers and demographic variables hold the potential for further refinement through considerations like APOE genotype and plasma markers.
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 | 0.013 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".