Article

Mapping progressive brain structural changes in early Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment.

Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, CA, United States.
Neuropsychologia (Impact Factor: 3.45). 02/2008; 46(6):1597-612. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.10.026
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common neurodegenerative disorder of the elderly, ranks third in health care cost after heart disease and cancer. Given the disproportionate aging of the population in all developed countries, the socio-economic impact of AD will continue to rise. Mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a transitional state between normal aging and dementia, carries a four- to sixfold increased risk of future diagnosis of dementia. As complete drug-induced reversal of AD symptoms seems unlikely, researchers are now focusing on the earliest stages of AD where a therapeutic intervention is likely to realize the greatest impact. Recently neuroimaging has received significant scientific consideration as a promising in vivo disease-tracking modality that can also provide potential surrogate biomarkers for therapeutic trials. While several volumetric techniques laid the foundation of the neuroimaging research in AD and MCI, more precise computational anatomy techniques have recently become available. This new technology detects and visualizes discrete changes in cortical and hippocampal integrity and tracks the spread of AD pathology throughout the living brain. Related methods can visualize regionally specific correlations between brain atrophy and important proxy measures of disease such as neuropsychological tests, age of onset or factors that may influence disease progression. We describe extensively validated cortical and hippocampal mapping techniques that are sensitive to clinically relevant changes even in the single individual, and can identify group differences in epidemiological studies or clinical treatment trials. We give an overview of some recent neuroimaging advances in AD and MCI and discuss strengths and weaknesses of the various analytic approaches.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Paul Thompson, Jul 02, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
73 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is an amyloid-facilitated tauopathy (Braak et al., 2000) whose origin and subsequent advance within the brain is well characterized: the disease begins in the mesial temporal lobe, an event accompanied by the accumulation of misfolded β-amyloid and tau proteins, and thence progresses along fiber pathways. Histopathological evidence of this highly stereotyped progression has come to be known as the Braak model (Braak and Braak, 1996): neurofibrillary tau tangles are first found in entorhinal cortex and hippocampus (stages I–II), then spread into the amygdala and basolateral temporal lobe (stages III–IV), followed by isocortical association areas (stages V–VI). Morphological changes accompanying this pathological progression are clearly visible on MRI, especially from cross-sectional and longitudinal morphometric mapping (Fischl et al., 2002, Klauschen et al., 2009, Smith et al., 2004 and Wu et al., 2007). Longitudinal studies (Apostolova and Thompson, 2008, Apostolova et al., 2007, Thompson et al., 2003 and Whitwell et al., 2007) confirm that progression follows vulnerable fiber pathways rather than spatial proximity (Englund et al., 1988, Kuczynski et al., 2010 and Villain et al., 2008), closely mirroring Braak pathological stages (Whitwell et al., 2007).
    Cell Reports 01/2015; 46(3). DOI:10.1016/j.celrep.2014.12.034 · 7.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Biomarkers are the only feasible way to detect and monitor presymptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD). No single biomarker can predict future cognitive decline with an acceptable level of accuracy. In addition to designing powerful multimodal diagnostic platforms, a careful investigation of the major sources of disease heterogeneity and their influence on biomarker changes is needed. Here we investigated the accuracy of a novel multimodal biomarker classifier for differentiating cognitively normal (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD subjects with and without stratification by ApoE4 genotype. 111 NC, 182 MCI and 95 AD ADNI participants provided both structural MRI and CSF data at baseline. We used an automated machine-learning classifier to test the ability of hippocampal volume and CSF Aβ, t-tau and p-tau levels, both separately and in combination, to differentiate NC, MCI and AD subjects, and predict conversion. We hypothesized that the combined hippocampal/CSF biomarker classifier model would achieve the highest accuracy in differentiating between the three diagnostic groups and that ApoE4 genotype will affect both diagnostic accuracy and biomarker selection. The combined hippocampal/CSF classifier performed better than hippocampus-only classifier in differentiating NC from MCI and NC from AD. It also outperformed the CSF-only classifier in differentiating NC vs. AD. Our amyloid marker played a role in discriminating NC from MCI or AD but not for MCI vs. AD. Neurodegenerative markers contributed to accurate discrimination of AD from NC and MCI but not NC from MCI. Classifiers predicting MCI conversion performed well only after ApoE4 stratification. Hippocampal volume and sex achieved AUC = 0.68 for predicting conversion in the ApoE4-positive MCI, while CSF p-tau, education and sex achieved AUC = 0.89 for predicting conversion in ApoE4-negative MCI. These observations support the proposed biomarker trajectory in AD, which postulates that amyloid markers become abnormal early in the disease course while markers of neurodegeneration become abnormal later in the disease course and suggests that ApoE4 could be at least partially responsible for some of the observed disease heterogeneity.
    01/2014; 4:461-72. DOI:10.1016/j.nicl.2013.12.012
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) recently added diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), among several other new imaging modalities, in an effort to identify sensitive biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD). While anatomical MRI is the main structural neuroimaging method used in most AD studies and clinical trials, DTI is sensitive to microscopic white matter (WM) changes not detectable with standard MRI, offering additional markers of neurodegeneration. Prior DTI studies of AD report lower fractional anisotropy (FA), and increased mean, axial, and radial diffusivity (MD, AxD, RD) throughout WM. Here we assessed which DTI measures may best identify differences among AD, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and cognitively healthy elderly control (NC) groups, in region of interest (ROI) and voxel-based analyses of 155 ADNI participants (mean age: 73.5 ± 7.4; 90 M/65 F; 44 NC, 88 MCI, 23 AD). Both VBA and ROI analyses revealed widespread group differences in FA and all diffusivity measures. DTI maps were strongly correlated with widely-used clinical ratings (MMSE, CDR-sob, and ADAS-cog). When effect sizes were ranked, FA analyses were least sensitive for picking up group differences. Diffusivity measures could detect more subtle MCI differences, where FA could not. ROIs showing strongest group differentiation (lowest p-values) included tracts that pass through the temporal lobe, and posterior brain regions. The left hippocampal component of the cingulum showed consistently high effect sizes for distinguishing groups, across all diffusivity and anisotropy measures, and in correlations with cognitive scores.
    01/2013; 3:180–195. DOI:10.1016/j.nicl.2013.07.006