| Literature DB >> 22915996 |
Willem de Haan1, Katherine Mott, Elisabeth C W van Straaten, Philip Scheltens, Cornelis J Stam.
Abstract
Brain connectivity studies have revealed that highly connected 'hub' regions are particularly vulnerable to Alzheimer pathology: they show marked amyloid-β deposition at an early stage. Recently, excessive local neuronal activity has been shown to increase amyloid deposition. In this study we use a computational model to test the hypothesis that hub regions possess the highest level of activity and that hub vulnerability in Alzheimer's disease is due to this feature. Cortical brain regions were modeled as neural masses, each describing the average activity (spike density and spectral power) of a large number of interconnected excitatory and inhibitory neurons. The large-scale network consisted of 78 neural masses, connected according to a human DTI-based cortical topology. Spike density and spectral power were positively correlated with structural and functional node degrees, confirming the high activity of hub regions, also offering a possible explanation for high resting state Default Mode Network activity. 'Activity dependent degeneration' (ADD) was simulated by lowering synaptic strength as a function of the spike density of the main excitatory neurons, and compared to random degeneration. Resulting structural and functional network changes were assessed with graph theoretical analysis. Effects of ADD included oscillatory slowing, loss of spectral power and long-range synchronization, hub vulnerability, and disrupted functional network topology. Observed transient increases in spike density and functional connectivity match reports in Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) patients, and may not be compensatory but pathological. In conclusion, the assumption of excessive neuronal activity leading to degeneration provides a possible explanation for hub vulnerability in Alzheimer's disease, supported by the observed relation between connectivity and activity and the reproduction of several neurophysiologic hallmarks. The insight that neuronal activity might play a causal role in Alzheimer's disease can have implications for early detection and interventional strategies.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22915996 PMCID: PMC3420961 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002582
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Comput Biol ISSN: 1553-734X Impact factor: 4.475
Figure 1Relation between structural degree and neuronal activity.
A: Six bins with ascending mean structural degrees are plotted against their average spike density and total power values. Nodes in the ‘very high’ degree bin were defined as hubs. Coupling strength (S) between neural masses was set to 1.5. Error bars indicate standard deviation within each bin. B: Similar plots as in the left panel, but for every region individually, and for three different coupling strengths S (see Text S1, section 3).
Cortical regions; degree of connectivity and level of activity.
| Cortical region |
|
|
|
| |
|
| 20 | 0.034 | ±0.004 | 435 | 420 |
|
| 19 | 0.034 | ±0.003 | 426 | 408 |
|
| 17 | 0.033 | ±0.004 | 428 | 447 |
|
| 13 | 0.035 | ±0.004 | 395 | 228 |
|
| 13 | 0.035 | ±0.004 | 408 | 296 |
|
| 13 | 0.034 | ±0.004 | 404 | 275 |
|
| 13 | 0.032 | ±0.005 | 410 | 342 |
|
| 13 | 0.032 | ±0.005 | 412 | 352 |
|
| 13 | 0.031 | ±0.005 | 403 | 312 |
|
| 12 | 0.032 | ±0.004 | 403 | 203 |
|
| 12 | 0.032 | ±0.005 | 395 | 226 |
|
| 12 | 0.031 | ±0.004 | 404 | 285 |
|
| 12 | 0.03 | ±0.004 | 398 | 278 |
| Postcentral Gyrus L | 11 | 0.033 | ±0.004 | 396 | 227 |
| Superior Frontal Gyrus, dorsal L | 11 | 0.032 | ±0.005 | 396 | 242 |
| Postcentral Gyrus R | 11 | 0.031 | ±0.004 | 395 | 261 |
| Superior Frontal Gyrus, dorsal R | 11 | 0.03 | ±0.005 | 396 | 234 |
| Superior Temporal Gyrus R | 10 | 0.034 | ±0.004 | 397 | 127 |
| Supplementary motor area R | 10 | 0.034 | ±0.005 | 398 | 188 |
| Cuneus R | 10 | 0.034 | ±0.004 | 398 | 276 |
| Superior Occipital Gyrus.L | 10 | 0.027 | ±0.004 | 398 | 264 |
| Insula L | 9 | 0.035 | ±0.006 | 395 | 143 |
| Inferior Temporal Gyrus L | 9 | 0.033 | ±0.004 | 395 | 184 |
| Lingual Gyrus L | 9 | 0.033 | ±0.005 | 398 | 205 |
| Supplementary motor area L | 9 | 0.032 | ±0.005 | 397 | 131 |
| Supramarginal Gyrus R | 9 | 0.032 | ±0.005 | 393 | 175 |
| Angular gyrus R | 9 | 0.03 | ±0.006 | 391 | 200 |
| Middle Temporal Gyrus R | 9 | 0.03 | ±0.005 | 393 | 177 |
| Fusiform Gyrus L | 9 | 0.03 | ±0.005 | 395 | 167 |
| Superior Parietal Gyrus R | 9 | 0.029 | ±0.005 | 393 | 207 |
| Middle Frontal Gyrus, R | 9 | 0.029 | ±0.004 | 400 | 61 |
| Inferior Frontal Gyrus, orbital part L | 9 | 0.028 | ±0.006 | 398 | 130 |
| Anterior Cingulate and paracingulate Gyri L | 9 | 0.028 | ±0.006 | 395 | 140 |
| Cuneus L | 9 | 0.028 | ±0.004 | 397 | 86 |
| Superior Frontal Gyrus, medial orbital R | 8 | 0.033 | ±0.004 | 393 | 109 |
| Angular gyrus L | 8 | 0.032 | ±0.005 | 392 | 232 |
| Superior Parietal Gyrus L | 8 | 0.03 | ±0.004 | 395 | 163 |
| Inferior Frontal Gyrus, opercular part.R | 8 | 0.029 | ±0.006 | 400 | 64 |
| Superior Frontal Gyrus, orbital part L | 8 | 0.028 | ±0.005 | 395 | 122 |
| Superior Temporal Gyrus L | 8 | 0.028 | ±0.004 | 402 | 74 |
| Middle Frontal Gyrus L | 8 | 0.028 | ±0.005 | 394 | 123 |
| Temporal Pole: middle temporal gyrus R | 8 | 0.026 | ±0.005 | 396 | 113 |
| Paracentral Lobule L | 8 | 0.026 | ±0.005 | 399 | 101 |
| Anterior Cingulate and paracingulate gyri R | 8 | 0.026 | ±0.004 | 394 | 143 |
| Fusiform Gyrus R | 8 | 0.024 | ±0.005 | 394 | 145 |
| Superior Frontal Gyrus, medial orbital L | 7 | 0.032 | ±0.003 | 390 | 120 |
| Median Cingulate and paracingulate gyri R | 7 | 0.031 | ±0.005 | 402 | 69 |
| Inferior Occipital Gyrus L | 7 | 0.03 | ±0.005 | 397 | 127 |
| Paracentral Lobule R | 7 | 0.029 | ±0.005 | 403 | 63 |
| Inferior Frontal Gyrus, opercular part L | 7 | 0.028 | ±0.006 | 405 | 31 |
| Supramarginal Gyrus L | 7 | 0.028 | ±0.006 | 398 | 75 |
| Gyrus Rectus L | 7 | 0.027 | ±0.004 | 394 | 63 |
| Rolandic operculum L | 7 | 0.027 | ±0.005 | 398 | 110 |
| Inferior Frontal Gyrus, triangular part L | 7 | 0.027 | ±0.004 | 396 | 101 |
| Superior Frontal Gyrus, orbital part R | 7 | 0.026 | ±0.004 | 405 | 37 |
| Inferior Parietal L | 7 | 0.026 | ±0.004 | 402 | 42 |
| Inferior Temporal Gyrus R | 7 | 0.015 | ±0.003 | 394 | 109 |
| Inferior Occipital Gyrus R | 6 | 0.031 | ±0.004 | 409 | 23 |
| Olfactory cortex R | 6 | 0.025 | ±0.004 | 396 | 134 |
| Parahippocampal Gyrus L | 6 | 0.025 | ±0.006 | 404 | 47 |
| Temporal Pole: middle temporal gyrus L | 6 | 0.025 | ±0.004 | 402 | 45 |
| Inferior Parietal R | 6 | 0.025 | ±0.005 | 394 | 112 |
| Median Cingulate and paracingulate gyri L | 6 | 0.024 | ±0.004 | 405 | 43 |
| Parahippocampal Gyrus R | 6 | 0.023 | ±0.005 | 399 | 60 |
| Rolandic operculum R | 6 | 0.023 | ±0.003 | 410 | 35 |
| Posterior cingulate Gyrus L | 6 | 0.021 | ±0.003 | 404 | 43 |
| Inferior Frontal Gyrus triangular part R | 6 | 0.02 | ±0.005 | 404 | 45 |
| Inferior Frontal Gyrus, orbital part R | 5 | 0.024 | ±0.006 | 404 | 31 |
| Insula R | 5 | 0.021 | ±0.004 | 404 | 17 |
| Temporal Pole: superior temporal gyrus L | 5 | 0.018 | ±0.003 | 405 | 29 |
| Middle Frontal Gyrus, orbital part L | 5 | 0.017 | ±0.004 | 390 | 163 |
| Posterior Cingulate Gyrus R | 5 | 0.013 | ±0.002 | 397 | 225 |
| Middle Frontal Gyrus, orbital part R | 4 | 0.022 | ±0.004 | 406 | 19 |
| Gyrus Rectus R | 4 | 0.014 | ±0.002 | 405 | 29 |
| Olfactory cortex L | 4 | 0.013 | ±0.003 | 400 | 37 |
| Temporal Pole: superior temporal gyrus R | 3 | 0.017 | ±0.003 | 403 | 17 |
| Heschl Gyrus L | 2 | 0.012 | ±0.002 | 405 | 9 |
| Heschl Gyrus R | 1 | 0.012 | ±0.002 | 403 | 6 |
List of human cortical regions included in the model, ranked in order of descending structural degree. Regions printed in bold were classified as hub regions.
Functional degree is based on broadband (0.5–45 Hz) functional connectivity.
S (coupling strength) was set at 1.5; different values of S produced different absolute values but no changes in functional degree rank. T (time delay) was kept constant at 0.002 s for all experiments (see Text S1, section 2). Averaged values and standard deviations over 20 runs of the NMM.
Figure 2Effect of ADD on structural degree.
A: All cortical regions binned according to initial structural degree from low to high values, and their average normalized node strengths at different stages of activity dependent degeneration (ADD). T = time. Error bars indicate standard error of the mean. B: All cortical regions binned according to initial structural degree from low to high values, and their average normalized node strengths at different stages of random degeneration (RD). T = time. Error bars indicate standard error of the mean.
Figure 3Effect of ADD on total power.
A: Average total power of hub and non-hub regions plotted over time, for both the ADD and RD procedure. Error bars indicate standard error of the mean. B: Correlation between structural degree and total power for all regions at different time points during ADD.
Figure 4Effect of ADD on spike density.
A: Average level of spike density during ADD is plotted for hubs and non-hubs. Error bars indicate standard deviations. B: Average level of spike density during RD is plotted for hubs and non-hubs. Error bars indicate standard deviations.
Figure 5Effect of ADD on functional connectivity and network topology.
Mean levels of synchronization likelihood, modularity, clustering coefficient and path length during ADD are plotted for hubs and non-hubs. Error bars indicate standard deviations.
Figure 6The relation between connectivity and activity at different stages of ADD.
The proposed relation between connectivity and activity is summarized for three different stages of ADD. Structural hubs have a higher baseline intrinsic activity, making them most susceptible to ADD. The second phase might represent the ‘Mild Cognitive Impairment’ (MCI) stage; structural connectivity declines steadily, but functional connectivity, power and spike density initially increase, leading to a pathologic spiral of increasing activity and metabolic burden in progressively weaker neurons. In the third “AD” phase, the damaged neurons and decreasing structural connectivity can no longer support the high demands, and the network collapses.
Figure 7The role of excessive neuronal activity in Alzheimer's disease.
Excessive neuronal activity might be a common pathway through which many of the known risk factors enlarge the chance to develop Alzheimer pathology. Hub regions are most likely to display activity-dependent pathology, since they have the highest intrinsic neuronal activity (which is further amplified in the initial phase of ADD).
Figure 8Outline of the consecutive steps in the experimental procedure.
Multi-step procedure from the simulation of realistic human neurophysiological activity to analyzing and correlating connectivity and activity results.
Graph theoretical definitions.
| Measure | Description | |
| Degree | k | Number of connections of a node. Average for all nodes in a network produces the average degree K. |
| Node strength (or weighted degree) | kw | Sum of all connection weights of a node. |
| Clustering coefficient | Cp | Number of directly connected neighbors of a node divided by the maximally possible number of interconnected neighbors. The mean of this value for all nodes gives the average clustering coefficient; a measure of local integration. |
| Path length | Lp | Shortest number of steps from one node to another. Average over all possible shortest paths is the characteristic path length of a network; a measure of global integration. |
| Gamma | γ | Normalized average clustering coefficient, obtained by dividing Cp by the average Cp of a set randomized networks of the same size and density. |
| Lambda | λ | Normalized characteristic path length, obtained by dividing Lp by the characteristic Lp of a set randomized networks of the same size and density. |
| Modularity | Q | Expresses the strength of the modular character of a network. |
Glossary of graph theoretical measures used in this study. For exact definitions, please refer to [14], [85].