Cited by 4Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms

Uncovering the Achilles heel of genetic heterogeneity: machine learning-based classification and immunological properties of necroptosis clusters in Alzheimer’s disease

Open access
Wei, Huangwei, Wu, Chunle, Yuan, Yulin, Lai, Lichuan·2023·Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience

Abstract

Background: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is an age-associated neurodegenerative disease, and the currently available diagnostic modalities and therapeutic agents are unsatisfactory due to its high clinical heterogeneity. Necroptosis is a common type of programmed cell death that has been shown to be activated in AD. Methods: In this study, we first investigated the expression profiles of necroptosis-related genes (NRGs) and the immune landscape of AD based on GSE33000 dataset. Next, the AD samples in the GSE33000 dataset were extracted and subjected to consensus clustering based upon the differentially expressed NRGs. Key genes associated with necroptosis clusters were identified using Weighted Gene Co-Expression Network Analysis (WGCNA) algorithm, and then intersected with the key gene related to AD. Finally, we developed a diagnostic model for AD by comparing four different machine learning approaches. The discrimination performance and clinical relevance of the diagnostic model were assessed using various evaluation metrics, including the nomogram, calibration plot, decision curve analysis (DCA), and independent validation datasets. Results: Aberrant expression patterns of NRGs and specific immune landscape were identified in the AD samples. Consensus clustering revealed that patients in the GSE33000 dataset could be classified into two necroptosis clusters, each with distinct immune landscapes and enriched pathways. The Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) was found to be the most optimal diagnostic model for the AD based on the predictive ability and reliability of the models constructed by four machine learning approaches. The five most important variables, including ACAA2, BHLHB4, CACNA2D3, NRN1, and TAC1, were used to construct a five-gene diagnostic model. The constructed nomogram, calibration plot, DCA, and external independent validation datasets exhibited outstanding diagnostic performance for AD and were closely related with the pathologic hallmarks of AD. Conclusion: This work presents a novel diagnostic model that may serve as a framework to study disease heterogeneity and provide a plausible mechanism underlying neuronal loss in AD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fnagi.2023.1249682

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The interplay between phenotypes and genotypes is part of the heterogeneity of AD.

    “The interplay between phenotypes and genotypes is part of the heterogeneity of AD.”
  • Increasing research recognizes etiological and clinical heterogeneity of AD as a hallmark of AD and related diseases (ADRDs), making diagnosis, treatment, and drug development/testing more difficult.

    “More and more research is recognizing the etiological and clinical heterogeneity of AD as a hallmark of AD and related diseases (ADRDs), which makes it more difficult to diagnose, treat, and develop and test new medications for AD.”
  • Cognitive, neurological, psychological, and functional deficits in AD are complicated and different due to interactions with environmental factors.

    “Cognitive, neurological, psychological, and functional deficits are complicated and different as a result of these interactions with environmental factors.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wei, H., Wu, C., Yuan, Y., & Lai, L.
Affiliations
The People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Yuan, Yulin
  • Lai, Lichuan
Venue
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
Published
2023-09-20
Volume
15
Pages
1249682-1249682
ISSN
1663-4365 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386942039
Cited by
3
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2
FWCI
0.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, necroptosis, necroptosis-related genes, disease heterogeneity, immune landscape, consensus clustering, weighted gene co-expression network analysis, nomogram, XGBoost, ACAA2, CACNA2D3, NRN1, TAC1, programmed cell death, neuronal loss

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