MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413283242 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2025.1559459

Accurate and robust prediction of Amyloid-β brain deposition from plasma biomarkers and clinical information using machine learning

2025· article· en· W4413283242 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Jiayuan Xu, Andrew J. Doig, Sofia Michopoulou, Petroula Proitsi, Fumie Costen

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGenentechIXICOH. Lundbeck A/SServierEisaiNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationPfizerNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationUniversity of Southern CaliforniaBiogenEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbBioClinicaU.S. Department of DefenseAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningAmyloid (mycology)NeuroscienceComputer scienceMedicinePsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Alzheimer's disease (AD) greatly affects the daily functioning and life quality of patients and is prevalent in the elderly population. Amyloid-β (Aβ) accumulation in the brain is the main hallmark of AD pathophysiology. Positron Emission Tomography (PET) imaging is the most accurate method to identify Aβ deposits in the brain, but it is expensive and not widely available. The development of a low-cost method to detect Aβ deposition in the brain, as an alternative to PET, would therefore be of great value. This study aims to develop and validate machine learning algorithms for accurately predicting brain Aβ positivity using plasma biomarkers, genetic information, and clinical data as a cost-effective alternative to PET imaging. Methods: We analyzed 1,043 patients from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset and validated our models on 127 patients from the Center for Neurodegeneration and Translational Neuroscience (CNTN) dataset. Brain Aβ status was determined using plasma biomarkers [Aβ42, Aβ40, Phosphorylated tau (pTau) 181, Neurofilament light chain (NfL)], Apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype, and clinical information [Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), age, education year, and gender]. Decision tree, random forest, support vector machine, and multilayer perceptron machine learning methods were used to combine all this information. We introduced a feature selection method to balance the performance and the number of features. We conducted a feature matching technique to enable our model to be tested on the external dataset without retraining. Results: = 127) and achieved an AUC of 0.90. When using only five features (pTau 181, Aβ42/40, Aβ42, APOE ɛ4 count, and MMSE) on 341 ADNI patients, we achieved an AUC of 0.87. Conclusion: The random forest, support vector machine and multilayer perceptron methods can accurately predict brain Aβ status using plasma biomarkers, genotype, and clinical information. The method generalizes well to an independent dataset and can be reduced to using only five features without losing much accuracy, thus providing an inexpensive alternative to PET imaging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207