Plasma GFAP for populational enrichment of clinical trials in preclinical Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cognitively unimpaired (CU) amyloid beta (Aβ)+ individuals with elevated plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) have an increased risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related progression. We tested the utility of plasma GFAP for population enrichment CU populations in clinical trials. METHODS: We estimated longitudinal progression, effect size, and costs of hypothetical clinical trials designed to test an estimated 25% drug effect on reducing tau positron emission tomography (PET) accumulation in the medial temporal lobe (MTL) and temporal neocortical region (NEO-T). RESULTS: compared to the other groups. An enrichment strategy selecting CU GFAP+/Aβ+ individuals would require a smaller sample size (≈ 57% reduction) and fewer Aβ PET scans (≈ 74% reduction) than trials enriched with Aβ PET alone, reducing total clinical trial costs by up to 64%. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that clinical trials focusing on preclinical AD recruiting Aβ+ individuals with elevated GFAP levels would improve cost effectiveness. HIGHLIGHTS: Cognitively unimpaired (CU) glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP)+/amyloid beta (Aβ)+ shows increased changes in tau positron emission tomography (PET) . CU GFAP+/Aβ+ enriched clinical trials require a reduced sample size compared to Aβ+ only. CU GFAP+/Aβ+ enrichment reduces Aβ PET scans required and costs. CU GFAP+/Aβ+ enrichment allows the selection of individuals at early stages of the Alzheimer's disease continuum.
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 | 0.070 | 0.120 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".