Evaluating the association of <i>APOE</i> genotype and cognitive resilience in SuperAgers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract INTRODUCTION “SuperAgers” are oldest-old adults (ages 80+) whose memory performance more closely resembles middle-aged adults. The present study examined APOE allele frequency in non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and non-Hispanic White (NHW) SuperAgers compared to controls and Alzheimer’s disease dementia cases. METHODS In 18,080 participants from eight cohorts, harmonized clinical diagnostics and memory, executive function, and language domain scores were used to identify SuperAgers, cases, and controls across age-defined bins. RESULTS NHW SuperAgers had significantly lower frequency of APOE- ε4 alleles and higher frequency of APOE -ε2 alleles compared to all cases and controls, including oldest-old controls. Similar patterns were found in a small yet substantial sample of NHB SuperAgers; however, not all comparisons with controls reached significance. DISCUSSION We demonstrated strong evidence that APOE allele frequency relates to SuperAger status. Further research is needed with a larger sample of NHB SuperAgers to determine if mechanisms conferring resilience differ across race groups.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".