Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders · 2020
Neurodegenerative Patterns of Cognitive Clusters of Early-Onset Alzheimer's Disease Subjects: Evidence for Disease Heterogeneity.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Phillips Meredith L, Stage Eddie C, Lane Kathleen A, Gao Sujuan, Risacher Shannon L, Goukasian Naira, Saykin Andrew J, Carrillo Maria C, Dickerson Bradford C, Rabinovici Gil D, Apostolova Liana G, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Alzheimer's disease (AD) with onset before 65 (early-onset AD [EOAD]) occurs in approximately 6% of cases and can affect nonmemory domains. Here, we analyze patterns of impairment in amnestic EOAD individuals using data-driven statistical analyses.
METHODS: Cognitive data of 146 EOAD subjects were Z-normalized to 395 cognitively normal (CN) individuals. Domain-averaged Z-scores were adjusted for age, sex, and education followed by Wald cluster analysis of residuals. Magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography comparisons of EOAD clusters to age-matched CN were done using Statistic Parametric Mapping 8. Cluster-level-family-wise error (p < 0.05) correction was applied. Mixed-effect models were used to compute longitudinal change across clusters.
RESULTS: Scree plot using the pseudo-T-squared suggested a 4-cluster solution. Cluster 1 (memory-predominant impairment) showed atrophy/hypometabolism in medial/lateral temporal, lateral parietal, and posterior cingulate regions. Cluster 2 (memory/visuospatial-predominant) showed atrophy/hypometabolism of medial temporal, temporoparietal, and frontal cortices. Cluster 3 (memory, language, and executive function) and Cluster 4 (globally impaired) manifested atrophy and hypometabolism throughout the brain. Longitudinally between-cluster differences in the visuospatial and language/executive domains were significant, suggesting phenotypic variation.
CONCLUSION: We observed significant heterogeneity in cognitive presentation among amnestic EOAD subjects and patterns of atrophy/hypometabolism in each cluster in agreement with the observed cognitive phenotype.
METHODS: Cognitive data of 146 EOAD subjects were Z-normalized to 395 cognitively normal (CN) individuals. Domain-averaged Z-scores were adjusted for age, sex, and education followed by Wald cluster analysis of residuals. Magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography comparisons of EOAD clusters to age-matched CN were done using Statistic Parametric Mapping 8. Cluster-level-family-wise error (p < 0.05) correction was applied. Mixed-effect models were used to compute longitudinal change across clusters.
RESULTS: Scree plot using the pseudo-T-squared suggested a 4-cluster solution. Cluster 1 (memory-predominant impairment) showed atrophy/hypometabolism in medial/lateral temporal, lateral parietal, and posterior cingulate regions. Cluster 2 (memory/visuospatial-predominant) showed atrophy/hypometabolism of medial temporal, temporoparietal, and frontal cortices. Cluster 3 (memory, language, and executive function) and Cluster 4 (globally impaired) manifested atrophy and hypometabolism throughout the brain. Longitudinally between-cluster differences in the visuospatial and language/executive domains were significant, suggesting phenotypic variation.
CONCLUSION: We observed significant heterogeneity in cognitive presentation among amnestic EOAD subjects and patterns of atrophy/hypometabolism in each cluster in agreement with the observed cognitive phenotype.