The effect of Alzheimer's disease genetic factors on limbic white matter microstructure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: White matter (WM) microstructure is essential for brain function but deteriorates with age and in neurodegenerative conditions such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). Diffusion MRI, enhanced by advanced bi-tensor models accounting for free water (FW), enables in vivo quantification of WM microstructural differences. METHODS: To evaluate how AD genetic risk factors affect limbic WM microstructure - crucial for memory and early impacted in disease - we conducted linear regression analyses in a cohort of 2,614 non-Hispanic White aging adults (aged 50.12 to 100.85 years). The study evaluated 36 AD risk variants across 26 genes, the association between AD polygenic scores (PGSs) and WM metrics, and interactions with cognitive status. RESULTS: AD PGSs, variants in TMEM106B, PTK2B, WNT3, and apolipoprotein E (APOE), and interactions involving MS4A6A were significantly linked to WM microstructure. DISCUSSION: These findings implicate AD-related genetic factors related to neurodevelopment (WNT3), lipid metabolism (APOE), and inflammation (TMEM106B, PTK2B, MS4A6A) that contribute to alternations in WM microstructure in older adults. HIGHLIGHTS: AD risk variants in TMEM106B, PTK2B, WNT3, and APOE genes showed distinct associations with limbic FW-corrected WM microstructure metrics. Interaction effects were observed between MS4A6A variants and cognitive status. PGS for AD was associated with higher FW content in the limbic system.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".