MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417001056 · doi:10.1136/jnnp-2025-336935

Metabolic brain networks in dementia with Lewy bodies: from prodromal to manifest disease stages

2025· article· en· W4417001056 on OpenAlexaff
Matej Perovnik, Urban Simončič, Jan Jamšek, Milica G. Kramberger, Joachim Brumberg, Philipp T. Meyer, Daniela Perani, Silvia Paola Caminiti, Matthias Brendel, Anna Stockbauer, Valle Camacho, Daniel Alcolea, Rik Vandenberghe, Koen Van Laere, Ji Hyun Ko, Chong Sik Lee, Matteo Pardini, Lorenzo Lombardo, Alessandro Padovani, Andrea Pilotto, M.A. Ochoa-Figueroa, Anette Davidsson, Consuelo Cháfer‐Pericás, Lourdes Álvarez‐Sánchez, Valentina Garibotto, Afina W. Lemstra, Daniel Ferreira, Silvia Morbelli, Chris C. Tang, David Eidelberg, Maja Trošt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological and metabolic disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersGenentechCenter for Innovative MedicineMedizinische Fakultät der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität FreiburgNational Institutes of HealthAbbVieHjärnfondenEisaiVetenskapsrådetBristol-Myers Squibb FoundationBioClinicaBiogenPfizerDipartimento di Scienze Biomediche Avanzate, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico IINovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationBureau of Educational and Cultural AffairsRocheU.S. Department of DefenseEli Lilly and CompanyGE HealthcareJohnson and JohnsonTakeda Pharmaceutical CompanyUniversità degli Studi di GenovaMerckAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsDiseasePathologicalDementiaDementia with Lewy bodiesLewy bodyValue (mathematics)Prodromal Stage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) is a supportive DLB biomarker. We evaluated a multivariate, quantifiable metabolic network biomarker, termed DLB-related pattern (DLBRP), for its further clinical translation across centres and disease stages. METHODS: We analysed demographic, clinical and FDG PET imaging data of 1180 participants from 14 tertiary centres and two multicentre datasets. We included 379 DLB, 28 mild cognitive impairment-LB (MCI-LB), 195 dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (ADD), 172 MCI-AD without α-synuclein co-pathology (MCI-AD-S-), and 73 MCI-AD with α-synuclein co-pathology (S+) patients, along with a comparative group of 333 normal controls (NCs). From the scans, we calculated the expression of DLBRP, AD-related pattern (ADRP) and Parkinson's disease-related pattern (PDRP) and compared them across groups. DLBRP scores were correlated with clinical measurements. RESULTS: Across independent cohorts, DLBRP robustly distinguished DLB from NCs (sensitivity >89%, specificity >90%), and scores correlated with Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III and independently predicted Mini-Mental State Examination. DLBRP was elevated already in MCI-LB. In a small longitudinal dataset, we observed steady increases in DLBRP expression with scores exceeding the diagnostic threshold prior to dementia onset. DLBRP and PDRP discriminated DLB from ADD (sensitivity, 74%-90%; specificity, 80%). In MCI-AD groups, ADRP was expressed, whereas DLBRP and PDRP were increased only in MCI-AD-S+, although comparatively less than in MCI-LB. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the value of DLBRP in diagnosing prodromal and manifest DLB and distinguishing them from their AD counterparts. While overlap between patterns may reflect actual co-pathology, this possibility cannot be accepted without thorough pathological confirmation. The current findings support the use of DLBRP in patient evaluation and in future trial design.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & PsychiatrySame topicNeurological and metabolic disordersFrench-language works237,207