MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399732203 · doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.1763

Parental History of Memory Impairment and β-Amyloid in Cognitively Unimpaired Older Adults

2024· letter· en· W4399732203 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mabel Seto, Timothy J. Hohman, Elizabeth C. Mormino, Kathryn V. Papp, Rebecca E. Amariglio, Dorene M. Rentz, Keith A. Johnson, Aaron P. Schultz, Reisa A. Sperling, Rachel F. Buckley, Hyun‐Sik Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Neurology · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsClinical Dementia RatingDementiaFamily historyMedicineAlzheimer's diseaseNeuroimagingMemory impairmentPsychologyDiseaseCognitionInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Studies have suggested that maternal history of late-onset Alzheimer disease, but not paternal, predisposes individuals to higher brain β-amyloid (Aβ) burden, reduced brain metabolism, and lower gray matter volumes. Objective: To characterize maternal vs paternal history of memory impairment in terms of brain Aβ-positron emission tomography (Aβ-PET) and baseline cognition among a large sample of cognitively unimpaired older adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study leveraged data from 4413 individuals who were screened for the Anti-Amyloid Treatment in Asymptomatic Alzheimer (A4) study, a randomized clinical trial conducted across 67 sites in the US, Australia, Canada, and Japan aimed at Alzheimer disease prevention. Data were collected between April 2014 and December 2017 and analyzed from December 2022 to June 2023. Participants were cognitively unimpaired adults (Clinical Dementia Rating = 0 and/or Mini-Mental State Examination score ≥25) between the ages of 65 and 85 years who underwent PET imaging to assess cortical Aβ levels for trial eligibility. A total of 4492 participants were screened, and 79 missing data were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures: Demographic characteristics (eg, age, sex, education), apolipoprotein E genotyping, participant-reported parental history of memory impairment and parental age at symptom onset were collected as variables. Parental history was assessed in terms of continuous neocortical 18F-florbetapir Aβ-PET and the Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite. Results: Of 4413 individuals (mean [SD] age, 71.27 [4.66] years, 2617 women [59.3%]), mean Aβ-PET was elevated in individuals with history of memory impairment in both parents (n = 455; mean [SD] standardized uptake value ratio [SUVR] = 1.12 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5) and in those with only maternal history (n = 1772; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.10 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 2.70 × 10-5) compared with those with only paternal history (n = 632; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.08 [0.18]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5) or no family history (n = 1554; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.08 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5). Paternal history of early-onset memory impairment (age <65 years) but not late-onset (age ≥65 years) was associated with elevated participant Aβ-PET (mean [SD] SUVR = 1.19 [0.21]; P = 3.00 × 10-6) in comparison with no paternal history (mean [SD] SUVR = 1.09 [0.19]) whereas maternal history was associated with elevated Aβ in both early-onset and late-onset groups. There was no association with cognition. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, maternal history (at any age) and paternal history of early-onset memory impairment were associated with Aβ burden among asymptomatic older individuals. Sex-specific parental history may help inform clinicians on likelihood of Aβ burden in offspring and help identify high-risk individuals at the earliest stages of disease for prevention.

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)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA NeurologySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207