ArticleScientific reports2026
Novel Alzheimer's disease-associated variants and genetic interactions identified from UK biobank whole-exome sequencing data using IBI-DT.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a highly heritable neurodegenerative disorder whose genetic architecture remains incompletely understood, particularly with respect to rare variants and higher-order interactions. We applied Individualized Bayesian Inference-Decision Tree (IBI-DT) to 790,000 whole-exome sequencing variants from 8,292 unrelated White British individuals in the UK Biobank, using genome-wide association analysis (GWAS) based on Fisher's exact test as a marginal association comparator and evaluated the findings in an independent ADSP-Discovery ICE cohort of 1,560 unrelated individuals with 852,997 variants. In the discovery cohort, IBI-DT identified 178 significant variants using empirical null calibration, which mapped to 173 genes, whereas GWAS identified 16 significant variants that mapped to four genes. Compared with GWAS, IBI-DT prioritized more rare variants among the top 178 signals (147 vs. 66 with minor allele frequency ≤ 0.01) and identified variants with less correlated, less redundant linkage patterns. The IBI-DT-prioritized variants included established AD genes as well as additional biologically supported genes not prioritized by GWAS. Replication supported three variants and four genes across cohorts, including gene-level replication of KIF14 and ZNF90, which were replicated only by IBI-DT. IBI-DT also identified significant gene-gene and gene-environment interactions and biologically plausible enriched pathways. Neural networks trained on IBI-DT-prioritized variants outperformed GWAS-based models (AUC 0.67 vs. 0.63). Overall, these findings indicate that IBI-DT complements GWAS by recovering established AD signals while prioritizing rare, less redundant, and interaction-related AD-associated signals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.