Glymphatic function and astrocyte reactivity potentiates tau load in Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is characterized by pathological protein deposition, and recent research suggests that glymphatic dysfunction and inflammation play critical roles in its pathogenesis. However, their direct interaction and impact on protein aggregation in AD have not been directly tested. METHODS: We enrolled a cohort including individuals with cognitive impairment (CI, including AD and mild cognitive impairment MCI) and cognitively normal controls. We evaluated glymphatic function using DTI-ALPS and inflammation through plasma GFAP, sTREM2, and CSF neuroinflammation markers. RESULTS: Participants with lower ALPS levels showed altered inflammation profiles, specifically higher plasma GFAP and different CSF inflammation markers. There was a significant negative correlation between ALPS and plasma GFAP, and a positive correlation between ALPS and certain CSF inflammation markers. Moreover, glymphatic function and astrocyte reactivity synergistically potentiated tau load. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a relationship between glymphatic dysfunction and inflammation in AD, with implications for therapeutic interventions targeting both processes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".