MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7119519309 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_107350

Investigating the combined effects of smoking and amyloid on brain structure in cognitively unimpaired adults using a machine learning‐based MRI marker

2025· article· en· W7119519309 on OpenAlexaff
Sindhuja Tirumalai Govindarajan, Elizabeth Mamourian, Dhivya Srinivasan, Guray Erus, Randa Melhem, Haochang Shou, C. Davatzikos

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionMagnetic resonance imagingCognitive declineAssociation (psychology)DiseaseNeurodegenerationNeuroimagingEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceLinear regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Smoking is a well‐established risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and its association with neurodegeneration and cognitive decline is an area of ongoing research. Critically, the interplay between smoking, Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology, and cognitive impairment remains incompletely understood. This study investigated the relationship between smoking, AD pathology as indexed by amyloid‐beta (Aβ) deposition, and cognitive performance using SPARE‐SM, a novel machine learning‐based marker that quantifies smoking‐related spatial patterns of abnormalities on individual structural magnetic resonance images (sMRI). Methods SPARE‐Smoking, derived from N = 37,098 cognitively unimpaired individuals from diverse cohorts, was evaluated in N = 222 individuals who had amyloid (Aβ) status available within +/‐ 1 year of the MRI scan in a subset of the training cohort. Amyloid deposition was determined using study‐specific cut‐offs for CSF and PET SUVR measures, categorizing participants as Aβ‐/Aβ+. Multivariable regression models were used to assess interactions between Aβ status, smoking history, and age on SPARE‐SM scores. Multivariable linear regression models, adjusted for age, sex, and years of education, examined associations between SPARE‐SM and cognitive performance. Results While the proportion of smokers was similar between Aβ+ and Aβ‐ participants (Table 1), SPARE‐SM showed a nuanced relationship with both Aβ and smoking status (Figure 1A). Specifically, SPARE‐SM was higher than SM+Aβ‐ individuals in SM+ Aβ+ individuals ( p <0.05) but lower in SM‐ Aβ+ individuals ( p <0.05). Importantly, higher SPARE‐SM was associated with worse cognitive performance, whereas simply classifying individuals as smokers or non‐smokers showed no associations with cognitive outcomes (Figure 1B). Conclusion These findings suggest a complex relationship between smoking, amyloid pathology, and cognition. The observation that SPARE‐SM differed by Aβ in smoking individuals highlights their potential synergistic effects on neurodegeneration. SPARE‐SM demonstrated associations with cognitive decline, even when clinical smoking status did not, emphasizing its potential for early risk identification. Further research is needed to disentangle the mechanisms linking smoking, brain changes, amyloid, and dementia.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.274 · 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→