ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2024
Classifying Alzheimer's Disease Neuropathology Using Clinical and MRI Measurements.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Computer-aided machine learning models are being actively developed with clinically available biomarkers to diagnose Alzheimer's disease (AD) in living persons. Despite considerable work with cross-sectional in vivo data, many models lack validation against postmortem AD neuropathological data. Objective: Train machine learning models to classify the presence or absence of autopsy-confirmed severe AD neuropathology using clinically available features. Methods: AD neuropathological status are assessed at postmortem for participants from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC). Clinically available features are utilized, including demographics, Apolipoprotein E(APOE) genotype, and cortical thicknesses derived from ante-mortem MRI scans encompassing AD meta regions of interest (meta-ROI). Both logistic regression and random forest models are trained to identify linearly and nonlinearly separable features between participants with the presence (N = 91, age-at-MRI = 73.6±9.24, 38 women) or absence (N = 53, age-at-MRI = 68.93±19.69, 24 women) of severe AD neuropathology. The trained models are further validated in an external data set against in vivo amyloid biomarkers derived from PET imaging (amyloid-positive: N = 71, age-at-MRI = 74.17±6.37, 26 women; amyloid-negative: N = 73, age-at-MRI = 71.59±6.80, 41 women). Results: Our models achieve a cross-validation accuracy of 84.03% in classifying the presence or absence of severe AD neuropathology, and an external-validation accuracy of 70.14% in classifying in vivo amyloid positivity status. Conclusions: Our models show that clinically accessible features, including APOE genotype and cortical thinning encompassing AD meta-ROIs, are able to classify both postmortem confirmed AD neuropathological status and in vivo amyloid status with reasonable accuracies. These results suggest the potential utility of AD meta-ROIs in determining AD neuropathological status in living persons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.