MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416099426 · doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcaf438

<i>HLA’s</i> hidden hand in Alzheimer’s disease—five research questions en route to an answer

2025· review· en· W4416099426 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lorenzo Capitani, Sarah M. Carpanini

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Communications · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUK Dementia Research InstituteMedical Research Council CanadaAlzheimer’s Research UK
KeywordsHuman leukocyte antigenDiseaseAlleleLocus (genetics)Genetic associationContext (archaeology)ImmunogeneticsAssociation (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The association of genetic variants in the Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) locus with late-onset Alzheimer’s disease has been stringently replicated across several, powerful genome-wide association studies. However, no clear picture has yet emerged of the mechanistic relationship between Alzheimer’s disease and this top genetic hit, despite the fact that the HLA locus is one of the most influential gene loci of the immune system, known to influence antigen presentation, T cell responses and brain plasticity. In this review, we explore this association by outlining five research questions, namely: (i) the association of HLA Class I and Class II genes with Alzheimer’s disease at the allelic and haplotypic levels, (ii) the unconventional role of HLA Class I in the brain, (iii) the infection hypothesis of Alzheimer’s disease in the context of the known role HLA proteins play in immunity, (iv) the possible antigen presentation of Alzheimer’s disease relevant self-antigens and in turn (v) the possibility of T cells existing that are specific for these antigens. Identifying the functional mechanisms underlying this important genetic association with Alzheimer’s disease may hold the key to unravelling new avenues of Alzheimer’s disease immunotherapeutics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain CommunicationsSame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207