Synergic effect of tau tangles and cortical thinning on cognitive decline in aging and Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Tau burden has been found to be involved in brain atrophy during aging, especially in regions such as the parahippocampal gyrus. However, how tau levels at baseline are associated with trajectories of tau accumulation, cortical thinning and cognitive impairment remains poorly understood. The goal of this study was to assess tau rate of change in patients between baseline Tau+ and Tau‐ patients. We also aimed to determine if tau status at baseline or rate of accumulation of tau interacted with the rate of cortical thinning of the parahippocampal regions, leading to an increased rate of change in cognition. Method We assessed 133 participants from the TRIAD cohort (mean age = 68.5 ± 8.9, 85 females) with at least two visits with tau‐PET using [18F]MK6240 and cortical thickness extracted using FreeSurfer 7. Average time between visits was 25.6 months. Patients were classified according to clinical status, Amyloid‐β status and tau status at baseline (CU AB‐Tau‐, CU AB+Tau‐, CU AB+Tau+, MCI AB+Tau‐, MCI AB+Tau+, AD AB+Tau+). The tau‐PET rate of change was calculated for each participant, voxelwise and with temporal meta‐ROI. The MMSE rate of change was calculated to quantify cognitive decline over follow‐up period. We assessed the voxelwise relationship between baseline tau status and tau‐PET rate of change. Results We found a voxelwise positive association between rate of accumulation of tau and tau status at baseline in both anterior temporal lobes. Furthermore, we found an interaction effect between tau‐PET at baseline and parahippocampal rate of atrophy on MMSE rate of change (standardized β = 0.48, p < 0.0001). Conclusion Our results suggest that tau status at baseline might impact the rate of accumulation of tau, and that higher baseline levels of tau interact with cortical thinning of parahippocampal regions, leading to faster rates of cognitive decline. Our results emphasize the importance of preventing tau burden to prevent faster pace of cognitive decline during the disease’s trajectory.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".