MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406201077 · doi:10.1002/alz.089149

Retinal imaging in polarized light of two different protein deposit types found in the retina in different neurodegeneration diseases (NDDs)

2024· article· en· W4406201077 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie C. W. Campbell, Hannah Gallop, Erik Mason, Laura Emptage, Rachel Redekop, Monika Kitor, Ging‐Yuek Robin Hsiung, Ian R. Mackenzie, Veronica Hirsch‐Reinshagen

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurodegenerationRetinaRetinalNeuroscienceBiologyMedicinePathologyBotanyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Amyloid and alpha synuclein proteins are brain biomarkers of different neurodegenerative diseases, many years before symptoms. We have shown that imaging dye‐free with polarized light makes retinal amyloid deposits visible as a biomarker, in the brain, of amyloid and Alzheimer's disease (AD) severity. Here, we extend to presumed retinal alpha synuclein deposits in those with brain pathology consistent with alpha synuclein. We have previously shown, using machine learning, that polarized light interactions of pure amyloid beta deposits and pure alpha synuclein deposits, grown on glass, differ. Methods Eyes and brains were donated by 10 individuals with brain pathology consistent with amyloid and moderate to high likelihood of AD, and from two individuals with pathology in which brain alpha synuclein is expected ‐ one with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and one with multiple system atrophy (MSA). Retinas were fixed and flat‐mounted, then imaged in differing polarized light states. 274, 47 and 12 deposits were imaged in retinas of those with AD, DLB and MSA respectively. Interactions with polarized light were calculated for each protein deposit imaged. Results Presumed amyloid beta and alpha synuclein deposits were visible in polarized light in retinas with brain pathologies consistent with AD, or DLB and MSA respectively (Figure 1). After correction for repeated measures, the means of many polarized light interactions were significantly different for the two presumed deposit types (Table 1). The distributions of the strengths of polarized light interactions and deposit areas (Figure 2) overlapped across deposit types. However, a combination of polarized light interactions separated the presumed retinal deposits of amyloid from those of alpha synuclein in two machine learning algorithms: random forest with an accuracy of >85% and a convolutional neural network (CNN) with an accuracy of > 90%. Linear retardance, which helped to separate the two types of retinal deposits in CNN was previously used to separate deposits of the two pure proteins. Conclusions Multiple interactions with polarized light differ between deposits of different retinal proteins. Dye‐free polarized light imaging of the retina shows promise in differentiating these deposits as biomarkers of different neurodegenerative diseases in the brain.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207