medRxiv

Dementia blood predictors vary by sex and genetic risk

Models distinguishing future dementia cases from others scored 0.85–0.90 in carriers of a dementia-linked gene variant versus 0.74–0.76 in noncarriers.

Paper by Sara Calhas, Yue Liu, Sheena Waters, +4 more authorsPetroula Proitsi · Queen Mary University of London
Blood cells surround distinct dark and pale protein clusters, with small groups of upright figures and differing molecules around the edges.

Our read

Biomarkers
Studied:
Preprint: cohort study of 43,759 UK Biobank participants, against gene-variant non-carriers
What changed:
Dementia prediction was better in gene-variant carriers (AUC 0.85-0.90 versus 0.74-0.76 in non-carriers), with the best performance in female carriers
The catch:
Effects of changing blood molecules on dementia risk were not measured
In the record:
The 990th paper on APOE with results in people; 3,739 on record in all.

Editor of record: Boris Djordjevic · AgingResearch.News

Follow @agingbrief

Blood samples from 43,759 UK Biobank participants were analyzed in an observational study of proteins and small molecules that predicted future dementia. The researchers divided participants into four groups by sex and whether they carried APOE ε4, a gene variant associated with dementia risk.

Machine-learning models distinguished future dementia cases best among female carriers. Most leading molecular predictors were specific to particular groups. The association between carrying the variant and dementia also differed by sex. When the UK Biobank models were applied to data from the Global Neurodegeneration Proteomics Consortium, 12 of 17 available leading predictors in female carriers and 10 of 16 in male carriers remained highly ranked.

Why it matters

For dementia, an age-related disease, the findings support searching for blood markers separately by sex and whether people carry this gene variant.

Caveats

The analysis tested prediction, not whether changing the measured molecules would alter dementia risk. The abstract does not give the prediction time frame, and the preprint has not been peer-reviewed.

Comments

Be the first to comment.