David J Libon1, Sarah R Preis2, Alexa S Beiser3, Sherral Devine4, Sudha Seshadri4, Philip A Wolf4, Charles DeCarli5, Rhoda Au4. 1. Department of Neurology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA dlibon@drexelmed.edu. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public, Boston, MA, USA Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public, Boston, MA, USA Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public, Boston, MA, USA Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, Center for Neuroscience, University of California, Davis, CA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Analysis sought to determine whether Wechsler Memory Scale-Logical Memory (LM)-correct responses and errors were related to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain volume measurements. METHODS: The LM immediate (LM-I) and LM delay (LM-D) free recall correct responses and related and unrelated errors were scored. Principal components analysis yielded a 3-factor solution: LM-I and LM-D correct responses, LM-I and LM-D-unrelated errors, and LM-I/-D-related errors. The MRI total cerebral brain volume, frontal brain volume, temporal horn volume (THV), and white matter hyperintensities volume (WMHIV) were obtained. RESULTS: Increasing THV (suggesting greater regional atrophy) was associated with lower scores on the LM-correct responses factor. Extensive WMHIV was associated with higher scores on the LM-related errors factor. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that LM-correct responses could relate to emerging brain alterations. Longitudinal research might enhance the sensitivity of this test to identify preclinical impairment and persons at risk of mild cognitive impairment and dementia.
OBJECTIVE: Analysis sought to determine whether Wechsler Memory Scale-Logical Memory (LM)-correct responses and errors were related to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain volume measurements. METHODS: The LM immediate (LM-I) and LM delay (LM-D) free recall correct responses and related and unrelated errors were scored. Principal components analysis yielded a 3-factor solution: LM-I and LM-D correct responses, LM-I and LM-D-unrelated errors, and LM-I/-D-related errors. The MRI total cerebral brain volume, frontal brain volume, temporal horn volume (THV), and white matter hyperintensities volume (WMHIV) were obtained. RESULTS: Increasing THV (suggesting greater regional atrophy) was associated with lower scores on the LM-correct responses factor. Extensive WMHIV was associated with higher scores on the LM-related errors factor. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that LM-correct responses could relate to emerging brain alterations. Longitudinal research might enhance the sensitivity of this test to identify preclinical impairment and persons at risk of mild cognitive impairment and dementia.
Authors: Reisa A Sperling; Paul S Aisen; Laurel A Beckett; David A Bennett; Suzanne Craft; Anne M Fagan; Takeshi Iwatsubo; Clifford R Jack; Jeffrey Kaye; Thomas J Montine; Denise C Park; Eric M Reiman; Christopher C Rowe; Eric Siemers; Yaakov Stern; Kristine Yaffe; Maria C Carrillo; Bill Thies; Marcelle Morrison-Bogorad; Molly V Wagster; Creighton H Phelps Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2011-04-21 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Marilyn S Albert; Steven T DeKosky; Dennis Dickson; Bruno Dubois; Howard H Feldman; Nick C Fox; Anthony Gamst; David M Holtzman; William J Jagust; Ronald C Petersen; Peter J Snyder; Maria C Carrillo; Bill Thies; Creighton H Phelps Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2011-04-21 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Joel Eppig; Denene Wambach; Christine Nieves; Catherine C Price; Melissa Lamar; Lisa Delano-Wood; Tania Giovannetti; Brianne M Bettcher; Dana L Penney; Rod Swenson; Carol Lippa; Anahid Kabasakalian; Mark W Bondi; David J Libon Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2011-10-07 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: David J Libon; Mark W Bondi; Catherine C Price; Melissa Lamar; Joel Eppig; Denene M Wambach; Christine Nieves; Lisa Delano-Wood; Tania Giovannetti; Carol Lippa; Anahid Kabasakalian; Stephanie Cosentino; Rod Swenson; Dana L Penney Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Liana G Apostolova; Jonathan H Morra; Amity E Green; Kristy S Hwang; Christina Avedissian; Ellen Woo; Jeffrey L Cummings; Arthur W Toga; Clifford R Jack; Michael W Weiner; Paul M Thompson Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2010-01-18 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Clifford R Jack; David S Knopman; William J Jagust; Leslie M Shaw; Paul S Aisen; Michael W Weiner; Ronald C Petersen; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Bruno M Jedynak; Andrew Lang; Bo Liu; Elyse Katz; Yanwei Zhang; Bradley T Wyman; David Raunig; C Pierre Jedynak; Brian Caffo; Jerry L Prince Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2012-08-03 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Duane L Beekly; Erin M Ramos; William W Lee; Woodrow D Deitrich; Mary E Jacka; Joylee Wu; Janene L Hubbard; Thomas D Koepsell; John C Morris; Walter A Kukull Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2007 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Rhoda Au; Joseph M Massaro; Philip A Wolf; Megan E Young; Alexa Beiser; Sudha Seshadri; Ralph B D'Agostino; Charles DeCarli Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2006-02
Authors: Brandon E Gavett; Ashita S Gurnani; Jessica L Saurman; Kimberly R Chapman; Eric G Steinberg; Brett Martin; Christine E Chaisson; Jesse Mez; Yorghos Tripodis; Robert A Stern Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-10-06 Impact factor: 3.240