Pierre Chapuis1, Mathilde Sauvée2, Maud Medici3, Amélie Serra2, Eldda Banciu1, Alexandre Moreau-Gaudry3,4, Olivier Moreaud2, Alexandre Krainik5,6. 1. Department of Neuroradiology and MRI, University Hospital of Grenoble, CS 10217, 38043 cedex 9, Grenoble, France. 2. Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Grenoble, Grenoble, France. 3. CIT803, University Hospital of Grenoble, Grenoble, France. 4. Joseph Fourier University, Grenoble, France. 5. Department of Neuroradiology and MRI, University Hospital of Grenoble, CS 10217, 38043 cedex 9, Grenoble, France. akrainik@chu-grenoble.fr. 6. INSERM U 836, Grenoble Institute of Neurosciences, Grenoble, France. akrainik@chu-grenoble.fr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We conducted a retrospective study to identify morphological subgroups of patients referred for AD or aMCI and to seek for differences across neuropsychological performances. METHODS: One hundred forty-five patients (mean age = 76.01, 88 women and 57 men) referred for AD, either at the stage of dementia or aMCI, were examined using structural MRI. Five observers reviewed blindly twice all examinations. We rated microangiopathy, hippocampal, parietal atrophies, including a gradient of fronto-parietal atrophy (GFPA). A multiple component analysis (MCA) followed by a hierarchical ascending classification was conducted to identify morphologically distinct subgroups. Among these, 76 patients completed all the neuropsychological tests. Univariate and multivariate analyses were further conducted on these data across morphological subgroups. The institutional review board approved the research protocol. RESULTS: Inter- and intra-raters' agreements were excellent and very good for microangiopathy and hippocampal atrophy ratings. They were higher for GFPA than for the parietal atrophy scale. MCA without priors identified three groups: group 1 was characterized by no/discrete microangiopathy, severe hippocampal, and predominant parietal atrophy; group 2 had significant microangiopathy, severe hippocampal atrophy, and no predominant parietal atrophy; group 3 had a mild hippocampal atrophy and parietal atrophies. In group 1, working memory profile was less impaired than in group 2 (p = 0.01). Neuropsychological performances of group 3 were higher in most domains. CONCLUSION: Combined characterization of microangiopathy, hippocampal, parietal, and GFPA allows identifying morphological subgroups among patients referred for AD and at risk. These groups have some neuropsychological differences, suggesting different pathophysiological mechanisms or co-existing conditions.
INTRODUCTION: We conducted a retrospective study to identify morphological subgroups of patients referred for AD or aMCI and to seek for differences across neuropsychological performances. METHODS: One hundred forty-five patients (mean age = 76.01, 88 women and 57 men) referred for AD, either at the stage of dementia or aMCI, were examined using structural MRI. Five observers reviewed blindly twice all examinations. We rated microangiopathy, hippocampal, parietal atrophies, including a gradient of fronto-parietal atrophy (GFPA). A multiple component analysis (MCA) followed by a hierarchical ascending classification was conducted to identify morphologically distinct subgroups. Among these, 76 patients completed all the neuropsychological tests. Univariate and multivariate analyses were further conducted on these data across morphological subgroups. The institutional review board approved the research protocol. RESULTS: Inter- and intra-raters' agreements were excellent and very good for microangiopathy and hippocampal atrophy ratings. They were higher for GFPA than for the parietal atrophy scale. MCA without priors identified three groups: group 1 was characterized by no/discrete microangiopathy, severe hippocampal, and predominant parietal atrophy; group 2 had significant microangiopathy, severe hippocampal atrophy, and no predominant parietal atrophy; group 3 had a mild hippocampal atrophy and parietal atrophies. In group 1, working memory profile was less impaired than in group 2 (p = 0.01). Neuropsychological performances of group 3 were higher in most domains. CONCLUSION: Combined characterization of microangiopathy, hippocampal, parietal, and GFPA allows identifying morphological subgroups among patients referred for AD and at risk. These groups have some neuropsychological differences, suggesting different pathophysiological mechanisms or co-existing conditions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alzheimer dementia; Lobar atrophy of brain; Magnetic resonance imaging; Neuropsychology; White matter
Authors: Joukje M Oosterman; Barbera Van Harten; Henry C Weinstein; Philip Scheltens; Joseph A Sergeant; Erik J A Scherder Journal: Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn Date: 2008-05
Authors: M Yoshita; E Fletcher; D Harvey; M Ortega; O Martinez; D M Mungas; B R Reed; C S DeCarli Journal: Neurology Date: 2006-12-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: An-Tao Du; Norbert Schuff; Joel H Kramer; Howard J Rosen; Maria Luisa Gorno-Tempini; Katherine Rankin; Bruce L Miller; Michael W Weiner Journal: Brain Date: 2007-03-12 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: M P Laakso; K Partanen; P Riekkinen; M Lehtovirta; E L Helkala; M Hallikainen; T Hanninen; P Vainio; H Soininen Journal: Neurology Date: 1996-03 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Domenico Inzitari; Giovanni Pracucci; Anna Poggesi; Giovanna Carlucci; Frederik Barkhof; Hugues Chabriat; Timo Erkinjuntti; Franz Fazekas; José M Ferro; Michael Hennerici; Peter Langhorne; John O'Brien; Philip Scheltens; Marieke C Visser; Lars-Olof Wahlund; Gunhild Waldemar; Anders Wallin; Leonardo Pantoni Journal: BMJ Date: 2009-07-06
Authors: Lilian Calderón-Garcidueñas; Vanessa San Juan Chávez; Nora B Vacaseydel-Aceves; Raymundo Calderón-Sánchez; Edgar Macías-Escobedo; Carmen Frías; Marcela Giacometto; Luis Velasquez; Renata Félix-Villarreal; Jessie D Martin; Christopher Draheim; Randall W Engle Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2016-08-11 Impact factor: 5.810