MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402483367 · doi:10.1186/s13195-024-01564-y

Impact of amyloid and cardiometabolic risk factors on prognostic capacity of plasma neurofilament light chain for neurodegeneration

2024· article· en· W4402483367 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Keun You Kim, Eosu Kim, Jun‐Young Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s Research & Therapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenentechNational Institutes of HealthIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiMeso Scale DiagnosticsNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Food and Drug SafetyNational Research FoundationNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationMinistry of Trade, Industry and EnergyBioClinicaBiogenPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaKorea Medical Device Development FundU.S. Department of DefenseEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaSeoul National UniversityAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCognitive declineBiomarkerDementiaNeurodegenerationCardiologyOncologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Plasma neurofilament light chain (NfL) is a blood biomarker of neurodegeneration, including Alzheimer's disease. However, its usefulness may be influenced by common conditions in older adults, including amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition and cardiometabolic risk factors like hypertension, diabetes mellitus (DM), impaired kidney function, and obesity. This longitudinal observational study using the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort investigated how these conditions influence the prognostic capacity of plasma NfL. METHODS: Non-demented participants (cognitively unimpaired or mild cognitive impairment) underwent repeated assessments including the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) scores, hippocampal volumes, and white matter hyperintensity (WMH) volumes at 6- or 12-month intervals. Linear mixed-effect models were employed to examine the interaction between plasma NfL and various variables of interest, such as Aβ (evaluated using Florbetapir positron emission tomography), hypertension, DM, impaired kidney function, or obesity. RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up period of 62.5 months, participants with a mean age of 72.1 years (n = 720, 48.8% female) at baseline were observed. Higher plasma NfL levels at baseline were associated with steeper increases in ADAS-Cog scores and WMH volumes, and steeper decreases in hippocampal volumes over time (all p-values < 0.001). Notably, Aβ at baseline significantly enhanced the association between plasma NfL and longitudinal changes in ADAS-Cog scores (p-value 0.005) and hippocampal volumes (p-value 0.004). Regarding ADAS-Cog score and WMH volume, the impact of Aβ was more prominent in cognitively unimpaired than in mild cognitive impairment. Hypertension significantly heightened the association between plasma NfL and longitudinal changes in ADAS-Cog scores, hippocampal volumes, and WMH volumes (all p-values < 0.001). DM influenced the association between plasma NfL and changes in ADAS-Cog scores (p-value < 0.001) without affecting hippocampal and WMH volumes. Impaired kidney function did not significantly alter the association between plasma NfL and longitudinal changes in any outcome variables. Obesity heightened the association between plasma NfL and changes in hippocampal volumes only (p-value 0.026). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the prognostic capacity of plasma NfL may be amplified in individuals with Aβ or hypertension. This finding emphasizes the importance of considering these factors in the NfL-based prognostic model for neurodegeneration in non-demented older adults.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s Research & TherapySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207