MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7118910206 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_106338

A protein panel including pTau217 outperforms pTau217 alone in identifying high tau load in amyloid positive individuals

2025· article· en· W7118910206 on OpenAlexaff
Guglielmo Di Molfetta, Wagner S. Brum, Andrea Benedet, Nesrine Rahmouni, Jenna Stevenson, Ilaria Pola, Laia Montoliu‐Gaya, Kaj Blennow, Henrik Zetterberg, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Nicholas J. Ashton

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLasso (programming language)CohortPositron emission tomographyAkaike information criterionDiseaseLinear regressionTau proteinBiomarker

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Recent anti‐amyloid trial designs for Alzheimer's disease (AD) have aimed to identify amyloid‐β (Aβ)‐positive patients without an advanced tau pathology, as they are most likely to benefit from these therapies. Blood‐based biomarkers might reduce the need to use cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or positron emission tomography (PET) but it is unclear whether phosphorylated tau‐217 (pTau217) alone would be effective to exclude this high‐tau group at screening. We investigated whether a blood‐based protein panel, including pTau217, could better distinguish early from late‐stage tau pathology in Aβ‐positive patients compared to pTau217 alone. Method Aβ‐positive participants from the TRIAD cohort ( n = 129; mean [SD] age, 70.4 [8.3] years; females [58.9%]) were classified as Braak Late (Braak V‐VI: n = 51) or Braak Early (Braak I‐IV: n = 78) by tau PET imaging([18F]MK6240). We employed the NULISAseq CNS Panel to quantify 120 CNS‐related proteins. A bootstrapped (1000x) LASSO regression was used to identify the most recurringly selected proteins for distinguishing Braak Late from Braak Early . Generalized linear models (GLM) for the multi‐analyte panel and pTau217, adjusted for age and sex, were used and their performance evaluated by ROC analyses and Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) scores. GLMs were also used to estimate probability scores for each patient for belonging to Braak Late . Result The bootstrapped LASSO regression retained pTau217, neuropentraxin receptor (NPTXR), vascular growth factor (VGF) and growth‐derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) in >75% of the iterations. ROC analysis demonstrated that the multi‐analyte panel (AUC=0.93: 95% CI 0.89‐0.98) had a significantly better prediction of Braak Late than pTau217 alone (AUC= 0.88; 95% CI 0.88‐0.94; P DeLong = 0.004). The fit of the model was also assessed by comparing AIC, where the multi‐analyte panel showed a reduction in the score to detect the Braak category, suggesting a better model fit. This was further supported by an ANOVA comparison between the two models, where the multi‐analyte model was significantly better than pTau217 alone ( P ANOVA < 0.001). Conclusion We identified three complementary proteins (NPTXR, GDNF, VGF) to pTau217 that can improve its ability in detect later Braak stages in Aβ‐positive patients. This suggests an immunoassay‐based panel might be a cost‐effective tool to exclude participants with high tau pathology in anti‐amyloid trials designs.

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)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments→French-language works237,207→