Frequent Alzheimer’s disease neuropathological change in patients with glioblastoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The incidence of brain cancer and neurodegenerative diseases is increasing with a demographic shift towards aging populations. Biological parallels have been observed between glioblastoma and Alzheimer’s disease (AD), which converge on accelerated brain aging. Here, we aimed to map the cooccurrence of AD neuropathological change (ADNC) in the tumor-adjacent cortex of patients with glioblastoma. Methods Immunohistochemical screening of AD markers amyloid beta (Abeta), amyloid precursor protein (APP), and hyperphosphorylated tau (pTau) was conducted in 420 tumor samples of 205 patients. For each cortex area, we quantified ADNC, neurons, tumor cells, and microglia. Results Fifty-two percent of patients (N = 106/205) showed ADNC (Abeta and pTau, Abeta or pTau) in the tumor-adjacent cortex, with histological patterns widely consistent with AD. ADNC was positively correlated with patient age and varied spatially according to Thal phases and Braak stages. It decreased with increasing tumor cell infiltration (P < .0001) and was independent of frequent expression of APP in neuronal cell bodies (N = 182/205) and in tumor necrosis-related axonal spheroids (N = 195/205; P = .46). Microglia response was most present in tumor cell infiltration plus ADNC, being further modulated by patient age and sex. ADNC did not impact patient survival in the present cohort. Conclusions Our findings highlight the frequent presence of ADNC in the glioblastoma vicinity, which was linked to patient age and tumor location. The cooccurrence of AD and glioblastoma seemed stochastic without clear spatial relation. ADNC did not impact patient survival in our cohort.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".