Mitochondrial Dysfunction Correlates with Brain Amyloid Binding, Memory, and Executive Function in Down Syndrome: Implications for Alzheimer’s Disease in Down Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Mitochondrial dysfunction is increasingly recognized as a central contributor to neurodegenerative diseases and age-related cognitive decline. Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) are at high risk of neurodegeneration due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD). This study aims to explore the relationship between mitochondrial dysfunction, brain amyloid-beta (Aβ) deposition, and cognitive decline in this population. Methods: We investigated mitochondrial function, brain amyloid-beta burden, and cognitive performance in a pilot study of a cohort of 10 eligible adults with DS selected from a sample of 28 individuals with DS. Phosphorus-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy (31P-MRS) was used to assess mitochondrial function in skeletal muscle using a post-exercise paradigm, while positron emission tomography using 11C-Pittsburgh compound B (PiB-PET) measured brain Aβ deposition. Cognitive performance was evaluated using the Cambridge Cognitive Examination adapted for individuals with Down syndrome (CAMCOG-DS) and executive function batteries. Results: Significant correlations were observed between slowed phosphocreatine (PCr) recovery in muscle and increased Aβ deposition in key brain regions, particularly the striatum. Cognitive performance inversely correlated with mitochondrial function, with pronounced deficits in memory and executive function tasks. Notably, an individual carrying the APOE-ε4 allele exhibited the poorest mitochondrial function, highest Aβ burden, and most severe cognitive impairment, suggesting a potential interaction between genetic risk and mitochondrial health. Conclusions: These findings highlight the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in DS-associated AD (DSAD) and its impact on cognition in adults. The results support targeting mitochondrial pathways as a potential therapeutic strategy to mitigate AD progression in DS populations. Further research with larger cohorts and longitudinal designs is needed to clarify causative mechanisms and develop effective interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".