OBJECTIVE: There are few studies examining P300 in the biological children of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). In addition to examining P300 in patients with AD, the current study examined the utility of P300 as a preclinical marker in the offspring of AD patients. METHODS: P300 was elicited from an AD group, their biological children, and two age- and gender-matched control groups using the auditory oddball paradigm. Each group consisted of 20 subjects each. ERPs recorded from sites Fz, Cz, and Pz were analysed using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Amplitudes were significantly smaller in the AD group when compared to controls. Both amplitude and latency values in the FH+ group were significantly impaired when compared to its control group. CONCLUSION: These findings replicate previous P300 amplitude abnormalities found in patients with AD. Further, participants with a family history of AD demonstrate possible preclinical evidence at the electrophysiological level. Comparisons with other findings and theoretical implications are discussed.
OBJECTIVE: There are few studies examining P300 in the biological children of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). In addition to examining P300 in patients with AD, the current study examined the utility of P300 as a preclinical marker in the offspring of ADpatients. METHODS:P300 was elicited from an AD group, their biological children, and two age- and gender-matched control groups using the auditory oddball paradigm. Each group consisted of 20 subjects each. ERPs recorded from sites Fz, Cz, and Pz were analysed using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Amplitudes were significantly smaller in the AD group when compared to controls. Both amplitude and latency values in the FH+ group were significantly impaired when compared to its control group. CONCLUSION: These findings replicate previous P300 amplitude abnormalities found in patients with AD. Further, participants with a family history of AD demonstrate possible preclinical evidence at the electrophysiological level. Comparisons with other findings and theoretical implications are discussed.
Authors: Robi Polikar; Apostolos Topalis; Deborah Green; John Kounios; Christopher M Clark Journal: Comput Biol Med Date: 2006-09-20 Impact factor: 4.589
Authors: Mario A Parra; Lindsay Lorena Ascencio; Hugo Fenando Urquina; Facundo Manes; Agustín M Ibáñez Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2012-12-05 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Hadeel Y Tarawneh; Wilhelmina H A M Mulders; Hamid R Sohrabi; Ralph N Martins; Dona M P Jayakody Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2021 Impact factor: 4.472