MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393992998 · doi:10.1002/ana.26930

Evaluating the Effect of Alzheimer's Disease‐Related Biomarker Change in Corticobasal Syndrome and Progressive Supranuclear Palsy

2024· article· en· W4393992998 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Indira García‐Cordero, Chloe Anastassiadis, Abeer Khoja, Alonso Morales‐Rivero, Simrika Thapa, Anna Vasilevskaya, Carly Davenport, Vishaal Sumra, Blas Couto, Namita Multani, Foad Taghdiri, Cassandra Jessica Anor, Karen Misquitta, Lawren VandeVrede, Hilary W. Heuer, David F. Tang‐Wai, Bradford Dickerson, Alexander Pantelyat, Irene Litvan, Bradley F. Boeve, Julio C. Rojas, Peter A. Ljubenkov, Edward D. Huey, Susan H. Fox, Gábor G. Kovács, Adam L. Boxer, Anthony E. Lang, Maria Carmela Tartaglia

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Neurology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteUniversity Health NetworkParkinson's Clinic of Eastern Toronto & Movement Disorders CentreOccupational Cancer Research CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAssociation for Frontotemporal DegenerationNational Institutes of HealthServierEisaiNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerBiogenBioClinicaNIH Clinical CenterF. Hoffmann-La RocheAlzheimer SocietyAlzheimer's SocietyUniversity of Southern CaliforniaH. Lundbeck A/SNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationAmerican Brain FoundationBristol-Myers SquibbU.S. Department of DefenseEli Lilly and CompanyGenentechIXICOAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsProgressive supranuclear palsyAtrophyBiomarkerNeuroimagingTauopathyCorticobasal degenerationMedicinePsychologyAlzheimer's diseasePathologyInternal medicineNeuroscienceDiseaseNeurodegenerationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of Alzheimer's disease (AD) -related biomarker change on clinical features, brain atrophy and functional connectivity of patients with corticobasal syndrome (CBS) and progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). METHODS: Data from patients with a clinical diagnosis of CBS, PSP, and AD and healthy controls were obtained from the 4-R-Tauopathy Neuroimaging Initiative 1 and 2, the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, and a local cohort from the Toronto Western Hospital. Patients with CBS and PSP were divided into AD-positive (CBS/PSP-AD) and AD-negative (CBS/PSP-noAD) groups based on fluid biomarkers and amyloid PET scans. Cognitive, motor, and depression scores; AD fluid biomarkers (cerebrospinal p-tau, t-tau, and amyloid-beta, and plasma ptau-217); and neuroimaging data (amyloid PET, MRI and fMRI) were collected. Clinical features, whole-brain gray matter volume and functional networks connectivity were compared across groups. RESULTS: Data were analyzed from 87 CBS/PSP-noAD and 23 CBS/PSP-AD, 18 AD, and 30 healthy controls. CBS/PSP-noAD showed worse performance in comparison to CBS/PSP-AD in the PSPRS [mean(SD): 34.8(15.8) vs 23.3(11.6)] and the UPDRS scores [mean(SD): 34.2(17.0) vs 21.8(13.3)]. CBS/PSP-AD demonstrated atrophy in AD signature areas and brainstem, while CBS/PSP-noAD patients displayed atrophy in frontal and temporal areas, globus pallidus, and brainstem compared to healthy controls. The default mode network showed greatest disconnection in CBS/PSP-AD compared with CBS/PSP-no AD and controls. The thalamic network connectivity was most affected in CBS/PSP-noAD. INTERPRETATION: AD biomarker positivity may modulate the clinical presentation of CBS/PSP, with evidence of distinctive structural and functional brain changes associated with the AD pathology/co-pathology. ANN NEUROL 2024;96:99-109.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of NeurologySame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207