MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408218101 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adt1288

Associations between hormone therapy use and tau accumulation in brain regions vulnerable to Alzheimer’s disease

2025· article· en· W4408218101 on OpenAlexaff
Gillian Coughlan, Zoe B. Rubinstein, Hannah M Klinger, Rory Boyle, Mabel Seto, Diana L Townsend, Danielle V. Mayblyum, Emma G. Thibault, Heidi I.L. Jacobs, M. Farrell, Jennifer S. Rabin, Kathryn V. Papp, Rebecca E. Amariglio, Suzanne L. Baker, Cristina Lois, Dorene M. Rentz, Julie C. Price, Aaron P. Schultz, Michael J Properzi, Keith A. Johnson, Reisa A. Sperling, Rachel F. Buckley

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsDiseaseAlzheimer's diseaseNeuroscienceHormone therapyMedicineBioinformaticsInternal medicinePsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elucidating the downstream impact of exogenous hormones on the aging brain will have far-reaching consequences for understanding why Alzheimer’s disease (AD) predominates in women almost twofold over men. We tested the extent to which menopausal hormone therapy (HT) use is associated with later-life amyloid-β (Aβ) and tau accumulation using PET on N = 146 baseline clinically normal women, aged 51 to 89 years. Women were scanned over a 4.5-year (SD, 2.1; range, 1.3 to 10.4) and 3.5-year (SD, 1.5; range, 1.2 to 8.1) period for Aβ and tau, respectively, ~14 years after the initiation of HT. In older women (aged >70 years), HT users exhibited faster regional tau accumulation relative to non-users, localized to the entorhinal cortex and the inferior temporal and fusiform gyri, with an indirect effect of HT on cognitive decline through regional tau accumulation. In younger women (aged <70 years), HT associations with tau accumulation were negligible. Findings are relevant for optimizing menopausal treatment guidelines.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations18
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207