OBJECTIVES: To determine if atrophy rates were higher for entorhinal cortex (ERC) than for hippocampus in Alzheimer disease (AD), to determine the relationship between hippocampal atrophy rate and memory impairment, and to compare atrophy rates of ERC and hippocampus in differentiating between patients with AD and cognitively normal (CN) controls. METHODS: Twenty patients with AD and 25 CN subjects had MRI scans and clinical evaluations twice approximately 1.9 years apart. ERC volumes were measured manually and hippocampal volumes were measured semiautomatically on volumetric T1-weighted MR images. RESULTS: In AD, the atrophy rate of ERC (7.1 +/- 3.2%/year) was higher (p < 0.02) than that of hippocampus (5.9 +/- 2.4%/year). Furthermore, memory deficit in mild AD, measured with the Delayed List Verbal Recall test, correlated significantly with atrophy rates of both ERC (r = -0.61) and hippocampus (r = -0.59). Atrophy rates of ERC and hippocampus were comparable in differentiating between AD and CN. Using atrophy rates of ERC or hippocampus to detect a 20% treatment effect with 90% power (p < 0.05) would require about 100 completed patients per arm in a 2-year study. CONCLUSION: The finding in AD that the atrophy rate in the entorhinal cortex is higher than in the hippocampus is consistent with the view that AD pathology begins in the entorhinal cortex.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if atrophy rates were higher for entorhinal cortex (ERC) than for hippocampus in Alzheimer disease (AD), to determine the relationship between hippocampal atrophy rate and memory impairment, and to compare atrophy rates of ERC and hippocampus in differentiating between patients with AD and cognitively normal (CN) controls. METHODS: Twenty patients with AD and 25 CN subjects had MRI scans and clinical evaluations twice approximately 1.9 years apart. ERC volumes were measured manually and hippocampal volumes were measured semiautomatically on volumetric T1-weighted MR images. RESULTS: In AD, the atrophy rate of ERC (7.1 +/- 3.2%/year) was higher (p < 0.02) than that of hippocampus (5.9 +/- 2.4%/year). Furthermore, memory deficit in mild AD, measured with the Delayed List Verbal Recall test, correlated significantly with atrophy rates of both ERC (r = -0.61) and hippocampus (r = -0.59). Atrophy rates of ERC and hippocampus were comparable in differentiating between AD and CN. Using atrophy rates of ERC or hippocampus to detect a 20% treatment effect with 90% power (p < 0.05) would require about 100 completed patients per arm in a 2-year study. CONCLUSION: The finding in AD that the atrophy rate in the entorhinal cortex is higher than in the hippocampus is consistent with the view that AD pathology begins in the entorhinal cortex.
Authors: Stefan J Teipel; Wolfram Bayer; Gene E Alexander; York Zebuhr; Diane Teichberg; Luka Kulic; Marc B Schapiro; Hans-Jürgen Möller; Stanley I Rapoport; Harald Hampel Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2002-02
Authors: Y Xu; C R Jack; P C O'Brien; E Kokmen; G E Smith; R J Ivnik; B F Boeve; R G Tangalos; R C Petersen Journal: Neurology Date: 2000-05-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: C R Jack; R C Petersen; Y Xu; P C O'Brien; G E Smith; R J Ivnik; B F Boeve; E G Tangalos; E Kokmen Journal: Neurology Date: 2000-08-22 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: A T Du; N Schuff; D Amend; M P Laakso; Y Y Hsu; W J Jagust; K Yaffe; J H Kramer; B Reed; D Norman; H C Chui; M W Weiner Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: P M Thompson; M S Mega; R P Woods; C I Zoumalan; C J Lindshield; R E Blanton; J Moussai; C J Holmes; J L Cummings; A W Toga Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: B C Dickerson; I Goncharova; M P Sullivan; C Forchetti; R S Wilson; D A Bennett; L A Beckett; L deToledo-Morrell Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2001 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Madhav Thambisetty; Jing Wan; Aaron Carass; Yang An; Jerry L Prince; Susan M Resnick Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2010-05-02 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Leonel E Rojo; Jans Alzate-Morales; Iván N Saavedra; Peter Davies; Ricardo B Maccioni Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2010 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Sandhitsu R Das; Brian B Avants; John Pluta; Hongzhi Wang; Jung W Suh; Michael W Weiner; Susanne G Mueller; Paul A Yushkevich Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2012-01-28 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Lei Wang; J Philp Miller; Mokhtar H Gado; Daniel W McKeel; Marcus Rothermich; Michael I Miller; John C Morris; John G Csernansky Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2005-10-21 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: An-Tao Du; Norbert Schuff; Linda L Chao; John Kornak; William J Jagust; Joel H Kramer; Bruce R Reed; Bruce L Miller; David Norman; Helena C Chui; Michael W Weiner Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2005-06-14 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Leon J Thal; Kejal Kantarci; Eric M Reiman; William E Klunk; Michael W Weiner; Henrik Zetterberg; Douglas Galasko; Domenico Praticò; Sue Griffin; Dale Schenk; Eric Siemers Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2006 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: John C Morris; Catherine M Roe; Elizabeth A Grant; Denise Head; Martha Storandt; Alison M Goate; Anne M Fagan; David M Holtzman; Mark A Mintun Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2009-12
Authors: Susanne G Mueller; Michael W Weiner; Leon J Thal; Ronald C Petersen; Clifford R Jack; William Jagust; John Q Trojanowski; Arthur W Toga; Laurel Beckett Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: H Bian; J C Van Swieten; S Leight; L Massimo; E Wood; M Forman; P Moore; I de Koning; C M Clark; S Rosso; J Trojanowski; V M-Y Lee; M Grossman Journal: Neurology Date: 2008-05-06 Impact factor: 9.910