The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Integrative analyses of neuroimaging, clinical, and multi-omics data identified meaningful Alzheimer’s disease progression subtypes
Open accessAbstract
Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is a common neurodegenerative disorder with diverse clinical manifestations. To better understand differences between diverse manifestations, we investigate from the difference in MRI ROI volumes among subtypes to their related different gene pathways. In this study, we identify three subtypes of AD development with fast, moderate, and slow progression rates from the MRI ROI volume biomarkers in the ADNI cohort. We further find differentially expressed proteins in CSF fluids among these AD patients and related significantly different genetic pathways. A total of 159 patients’ data are included for analysis. We identify three distinct subtypes from the hierarchical clustering on MRI ROI volume biomarkers. Subtype 1, characterized as fast progression, consists of 34 patients (21.9%). Subtype 2, as moderate progression, comprises 77 patients (49.6%). Subtype 3, as slow progression, consists of 44 patients (28.3%). These subtypes show significantly differences in cognitive test scores and corresponding genetic pathways.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Adding neuroimaging data enriches stratification by revealing distinct progression patterns across biomarker-defined subgroups.
“The addition of neuroimaging data further enriches stratification efforts by revealing distinct progression patterns across biomarker-defined subgroups347,401,402.”
From Artificial intelligence-driven multi-omics approaches in Alzheimer's disease: Progress, challenges, and future directions (2025) · cites this paper as [401]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ren, F., Wei, J., Chen, Q., Hu, M., Yu, L., Mi, J., Zhou, X., Qin, D., Wu, J., & Wu, A. (2025) · Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B · doi:10.1016/j.apsb.2025.07.030 · Cited by 97
Metadata
- Authors
- An, Q., Zhang, M., Hu, X., Su, C., Wang, F., & Zhu, Y.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Arlington (US)
- Temple University (US)
- Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Zhu, Yingying
- Venue
- medRxiv
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2022-11-02
- OpenAlex
- W4308144228
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- medRxiv (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Keywords
- Alzheimer's disease, cerebrospinal fluid proteomics, differentially expressed proteins, gene pathways, cognitive decline, disease heterogeneity, ADNI cohort
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review