Cerebrospinal Fluid p-Tau181/Amyloid Beta 42 Ratio Identifies Lymphatic-Venous Anastomosis Patients Who Respond to and Benefit from the Surgery for Relief of Cognitive Impairment with a Diagnostic Accuracy of 0.744
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Responders (R) and Non-Responders (NR) to lymphatic-venous anastomosis (LVA) surgery for relief of cognitive impairment show significant difference in their p-tau181/Aβ42 ratios via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) of their cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). LVA involves the conjugation of a lymph vessel to a small vein in the neck to facilitate lymph flow. The R and NR groups were classified using five standard cognitive assessment tools: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale – Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog), Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR), and augmented by clinical assessments. ELISA results for 43 patients were available. Welch’s t test and Mann–Whitney U-test revealed significant difference between R and NR’s p-tau181 value and p-tau181/Aβ42 ratio. Using a p-tau181/Aβ42 cutpoint of 0.0923 allows patient selection for LVA with a specificity of 0.800, sensitivity of 0.667, positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.706, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.769. The diagnostic accuracy is 0.744. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve gives an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.793, which compares well with those of biomarker tests currently in use: prostate specific antigen (PSA), Straticyte and Oncotype DX. The p-tau181/Aβ42 ratio could serve to predict LVA’s effectiveness in alleviating AD patients’ symptoms and to rule-in patients for LVA, once validation from a larger patient cohort is available.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".