MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406223688 · doi:10.1002/alz.095754

Performance of plasma biomarkers for diagnosis and prediction of dementia in a Brazilian cohort

2024· article· en· W4406223688 on OpenAlexaff
Luís E. Santos, Paulo Mattos, TC Pinheiro, Ananssa Silva, Cláudia Drummond, Felipe Kenji Sudo, Fernanda G. Q. Barros‐Aragão, Bart Vanderborght, Carlos Otávio Brandão, Sérgio T. Ferreira, Fernanda Tovar‐Moll, Fernanda G. De Felice

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaCohortMedicineInternal medicinePsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Dementia is a growing concern throughout the developing world and is severely underdiagnosed among the Brazilian population. Despite remarkable progress in the biomarker field in recent years, local testing and validation of plasma biomarkers of AD and dementia is still lacking in Brazil and Latin America. Method In this longitudinal cohort study of 145 participants, the diagnostic performance of plasma biomarkers was assessed based on clinical diagnosis and CSF biomarker positivity. Follow‐up data of up to 4.7 years were used to determine biomarker performance in predicting diagnostic conversions. The study was conducted at the Memory Clinic at the D’Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR) in Rio de Janeiro. Participants were volunteers referred to the service. All were native Brazilians, had Portuguese as their first language and 60+ years of age. They were diagnosed (DSM‐5 criteria) and underwent extensive psychiatric and laboratory assessments. Diagnoses outside the scope of the study were excluded. CSF biomarker data was available for 34% of the sample. Participants were categorized as cognitively normal controls (n = 49), amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI; n = 29), Alzheimer’s disease (AD; n = 37), Lewy body dementia (n = 23), or vascular dementia (n = 7). Plasma samples collected at initial and follow‐up visits were tested for relevant biomarkers. Result Plasma Tau, Aβ40, Aβ42, NfL, GFAP, pTau231 and pTau181 were measured on the SIMOA HD‐X platform. Results were evaluated against clinical diagnosis and CSF biomarker status. Plasma NfL and GFAP could discriminate between all‐cause dementia and controls with ROC AUCs of 0.79 (95% CI: [0.70–0.87]) and 0.74 [0.65–0.83], respectively. Plasma pTau181 had good diagnostic performance discriminating clinical AD (AUC = 0.89 [0.82–0.96]), CSF‐biomarker+ aMCI/AD (AUC = 0.90 [0.82–0.98]), or CSF‐biomarker‐confirmed AD (AUC = 0.95 [0.89–1.00]) from controls. Conclusion In this first description of the plasma biomarker profile of a Brazilian dementia cohort, plasma pTau181 confirmed its potential as a clinically useful diagnostic tool. This study comprises an initial step towards local validation and adoption of dementia biomarkers in Brazil and Latin America.

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)0.005
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207