Differential Patterns of Brain and Body Aging on MR Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Comparative information on how whole‐body organs are linked with age and the brain is lacking. Method Overall, 7,149 healthy participants from four sites (Mean age 53.06 ± 12.95 years, 18‐97 years; 48% women; 52% men; 38% non‐white) were scanned on 1.5T MR machines with a whole‐body protocol. Whole body sequences utilized in the quantitative analyses were coronal T1 for organ, fat and muscle segmentation. Deep learning with FastSurfer on MPRAGE trained on 134 participants aged 27‐66 and segmented 96 brain regions. Partial correlation analysis was done controlling for sex and total intracranial volume for brain regions and total abdominal organ volume for abdominal organs. Multiple comparisons were accounted for using the Bonferroni method. Result Age negatively correlated with gray matter (rp = ‐0.38, p = 6.31×10−244) and white matter (rp = ‐0.263, p = 4.03×10−112). Age positively correlated to cerebral ventricle volume (rp = 0.493, p < .001). Increasing age was also inversely correlated with the lobar structural volumes: frontal lobe (rp = ‐0.420 p = 2.70×10−302), temporal lobe (rp = ‐0.378 p = 4.50×10−240), parietal lobe (rp ‐0.373 with p = 2.22×10−233), occipital lobe (rp = ‐0.259; p = 1.58×10−108). Age negatively correlated with AD risk regions: hippocampus (rp = ‐0.288 and p = 9.79×10−136), posterior cingulate (rp = ‐0.338, p = 4.37×10−189), precuneus (rp = ‐0.321, p= 1.44×10−169). Beyond the brain, the kidney and psoas muscle showed significant negative correlations with age (kidney; rp= ‐0.114, p = 1.23×10−211) and the psoas muscle (rp = ‐0.353, p= 1.13×10−208). Strikingly, visceral fat (vfat) was found to have a strong positive correlation with age, (rp = 0.416, p= 8.81×10−297). Subcutaneous fat (sfat), by contrast, showed a null correlation (rp = ‐0.01, p=1.0). Increasing age showed negative correlations with liver volumes (rp = ‐0.226, p = 2.21×10‐82), spleen (rp = ‐0.262, 5.46×10‐112) and total muscle volume (rp = ‐0.317, 3.17×10‐165). Conclusion Differential patterns of brain and body organ aging may lend insight into how age can increase the risk for common brain disorders in the elderly such as Alzheimer’s.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".