MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7119503789 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_105163

Cortical freewater increases in areas of tau tangle aggregation, independent of cortical thinning

2025· article· en· W7119503789 on OpenAlexaff
Brandon J Hall, Etienne Aumont, Arnaud Boré, Joseph Therriault, Nesrine Rahmouni, Arthur Macedo, Stijn Servaes, Gleb Bezgin, Jaime Fernández Arias, Yi‐Ting Wang, Tevy Chan, Lydia Trudel, J. K. M. ller Stevenson, Andrea Benedet, Gallen Triana‐Baltzer, Hartmuth Christian Kolb, Nicholas Ashton, Henrik Zetterberg, K. Blennow, Maxime Descôteaux, Jesse Klostranec, Pedro Rosa‐Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversité de SherbrookeMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTauopathyAmyloid (mycology)Partial volumeHippocampal formationAtrophyDiffusion MRIAlzheimer's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background It is unclear how cortical microstructure changes across biological stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and how this occurs in response to amyloid plaques, tauopathy, and inflammation. We hypothesize that tauopathy is chiefly responsible. To test this, we investigated how different measures of tauopathy, including plasma and PET, influence the microstructure in the whole brain, temporal meta‐ROI, and hippocampus. Method We sampled 301 participants (59% female, age 67±10) from the TRIAD cohort with T1 MRI, diffusion‐weighted MRI, amyloid PET (F 18 ‐NAV4694), tau PET (F 18 ‐MK6240), and plasma biomarkers. We used the NODDI‐flow pipeline to estimate the diffusion characters of the TRIAD cohort (D parallel , D orthogonal ,D isotropic ) and run the NODDI‐Bingham algorithm to calculate whole‐brain isotropic volume fraction images (“freewater”). FreeSurfer 7 was used to derive hippocampal and temporal meta‐ROI masks (entorhinal, fusiform, interior temporal, and middle temporal gyri). The Standard Uptake Value Ratio (SUVR) method produced amyloid and tau PET images. Plasma biomarkers were measured by Simoa assay. For group comparison, we stratified participants by amyloid SUVR positivity, plasma ptau 217 positivity (T1), and tau SUVR positivity (T2). We performed voxel‐wise correlations between freewater and tauopathy markers via VoxelStats MATLAB toolbox. Mediation analyses were performed in R 4.4.1. Models covaried for amyloid SUVR, age, sex, APOE4 genotype status, and meta‐ROI cortical thickness. Multiple comparisons correction performed by random field theory method. Result Tau PET positively correlated with freewater in gray matter within temporal and occipital regions, whereas p ‐tau217 did so in periventricular white matter (Figure 1A, Figure 2A). The effect of p ‐tau217 is only present in participants positive for tau tangles (Figure 2C). Freewater increased only in the A+T2+ group in the meta‐ROI and hippocampus (Figure 1B,C). Tau SUVR in meta‐ROI mediated the correlations between both GFAP and ‐tau217 with freewater in the A+T+ group (Figure 3). Conclusion In regions of AD‐relevant gray matter, increased freewater correlates with tau tangle accumulation independent of cortical thinning and amyloidopathy. Additionally, the positive correlation of p ‐tau217 with freewater in the periventricular white matter suggests involvement with ventricular remodeling or local CSF/ISF dynamics. Astrogliosis may be involved with microstructural changes secondary to neurofibrillary tangles.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→