Cognition Mediates the Association Between Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers of Amyloid and P-Tau and Neuropsychiatric Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) can be an early manifestation of Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the associations among NPS, cognition, and AD biomarkers across the disease spectrum are unclear. Objective: We analyzed cross-sectional mediation pathways between cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers of AD (Aβ1-42, p-tau181), cognitive function, and NPS. Methods: Primary models included 781 participants from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) data set who had CSF analyzed for AD biomarkers using Lumipulse. NPS were assessed with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q). We assessed cognition with the harmonized MMSE/MoCA, as well as neuropsychological tests sensitive to AD pathology: story recall, naming, animal fluency, and Trails B. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR®) scale assessed dementia severity. Mediation models were estimated with Kemeny metric covariance in a structural equation model framework, controlling for age, education, sex, and APOEɛ4. Results: The sample was older adults (M = 73.85, SD = 6.68; 49.9% male, 390; 27.9% dementia, 218) who were predominantly white (n = 688, 88.1%). Higher p-tau181/Aβ1-42 ratio predicted higher NPI-Q, which was partially mediated by the MMSE/MoCA and, in a second model, story recall. No other pathway was statistically significant. Both the MMSE/MoCA and NPI-Q independently mediated the association between p-tau181/Aβ1-42 ratio and CDR global impairment. With dementia excluded, p-tau181/Aβ1-42 ratio was no longer associated with the NPI-Q. Conclusions: NPS may be secondary to cognitive impairment and AD pathology through direct and indirect pathways. NPS independently predict dementia severity in AD. However, AD pathology likely plays less of a role in NPS in samples without dementia.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".