Table 4 The effects of CSF P-tau, VILIP-1, and YKL-40 on classification
Model | CN vs AD | sMCI vs pMCI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Correct | Correct | Correct | Correct | |
CN (%) | AD (%) | sMCI (%) | pMCI (%) | |
No covariates | ||||
P-tau only | 29/32 (90.6%) | 14/18 (77.8%) | 11/24 (45.8%) | 42/47 (89.4%) |
VILIP only | 29/32 (90.6%) | 8/18 (44.4%) | 6/24 (25.0%) | 43/47 (91.5%) |
YKL-40 only | 29/32 (90.6%) | 2/18 (11.1%) | 0/24 (0%) | 47/47 (100%) |
P-tau & VILIP | 29/32 (90.6%) | 13/18 (72.2%) | 9/24 (37.5%) | 39/47 (83.0%) |
P-tau & YKL-40 | 29/32 (90.6%) | 14/18 (77.8%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | 40/47 (85.1%) |
VILIP & YKL-40 | 30/32 (93.8%) | 8/18 (44.4%) | 5/24 (20.8%) | 42/47 (89.4%) |
P-tau & VILIP & YKL-40 | 29/32 (90.6%) | 14/18 (77.8%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | 39/47 (83.0%) |
Adjusted for age, gender, education, and Aβ42 | ||||
P-tau only | 29/32 (90.6%) | 16/18 (88.9%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | 41/47 (87.2%) |
VILIP only | 27/32 (84.4%) | 15/18 (83.3%) | 9/24 (37.5%) | 41/47 (87.2%) |
YKL-40 only | 28/32 (87.5%) | 13/18 (72.2%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | 42/47 (89.4%) |
P-tau & VILIP | 30/32 (93.8%) | 17/18 (94.4%) | 12/24 (50%) | 42/47 (89.4%) |
P-tau & YKL-40 | 30/32 (93.8%) | 16/18 (88.9%) | 10/24 (41.7%) | 42/47 (89.4%) |
VILIP & YKL-40 | 28/32 (87.5%) | 15/18 (83.3%) | 9/24 (37.5%) | 41/47 (87.2%) |
P-tau & VILIP & YKL-40 | 30/32 (93.8%) | 17/18 (94.4%) | 11/24 (45.8%) | 40/47 (85.1%) |