Disentangling sex-dependent effects of APOE on diverse trajectories of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current diagnostic systems for Alzheimer's disease (AD) rely upon clinical signs and symptoms, despite the fact that the multiplicity of clinical symptoms renders various neuropsychological assessments inadequate to reflect the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. Since putative neuroimaging biomarkers play a crucial role in understanding the etiology of AD, we sought to stratify the diverse relationships between AD biomarkers and cognitive decline in the aging population and uncover risk factors contributing to the diversities in AD. To do so, we capitalized on a large amount of neuroimaging data from the ADNI study to examine the inflection points along the dynamic relationship between cognitive decline trajectories and whole-brain neuroimaging biomarkers, using a state-of-the-art statistical model of change point detection. Our findings indicated that the temporal relationship between AD biomarkers and cognitive decline may differ depending on the synergistic effect of genetic risk and biological sex. Specifically, tauopathy-PET biomarkers exhibit a more dynamic and age-dependent association with Mini-Mental State Examination scores (p<0.05), with inflection points at 72, 78, and 83 years old, compared with amyloid-PET and neurodegeneration (cortical thickness from MRI) biomarkers. In the landscape of health disparities in AD, our analysis indicated that biological sex moderates the rate of cognitive decline associated with APOE4 genotype. Meanwhile, we found that higher education levels may moderate the effect of APOE4, acting as a marker of cognitive reserve.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".