| Literature DB >> 27733827 |
Xia Wu1, Qing Li2, Xinyu Yu2, Kewei Chen3, Adam S Fleisher4, Xiaojuan Guo2, Jiacai Zhang2, Eric M Reiman3, Li Yao1, Rui Li5.
Abstract
The triple network model, consisting of the central executive network (CEN), salience network (SN) and default mode network (DMN), has been recently employed to understand dysfunction in core networks across various disorders. Here we used the triple network model to investigate the large-scale brain networks in cognitively normal apolipoprotein e4 (APOE4) carriers who are at risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD). To explore the functional connectivity for each of the three networks and the effective connectivity among them, we evaluated 17 cognitively normal individuals with a family history of AD and at least one copy of the APOE4 allele and compared the findings to those of 12 individuals who did not carry the APOE4 gene or have a family history of AD, using independent component analysis (ICA) and Bayesian network (BN) approach. Our findings indicated altered within-network connectivity that suggests future cognitive decline risk, and preserved between-network connectivity that may support their current preserved cognition in the cognitively normal APOE4 allele carriers. The study provides novel sights into our understanding of the risk factors for AD and their influence on the triple network model of major psychopathology.Entities:
Keywords: APOE4; Alzheimer’s disease; Bayesian network; connectivity; fMRI; triple network model
Year: 2016 PMID: 27733827 PMCID: PMC5039208 DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00231
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Aging Neurosci ISSN: 1663-4365 Impact factor: 5.750
Figure 1Functional connectivity maps of the central executive network (CEN; A) default mode network (DMN; B) and salience network (SN; C) in LR (upper panel) and HR (lower panel) groups. The maps were derived from the one-sample t-test of Group independent component analysis (ICA; p < 0.001, corrected by family wise error (FWE)). Bar at the right shows T-values.
Figure 2Regions showing between-group functional connectivity difference. The comparison was performed for each of the triple networks by the two-sample t-test with p < 0.05, false discovery rate (FDR) correction. (A) shows the regions in which functional connectivity are stronger in LR group than in HR group (LR > HR), and (B) shows the opposite case (HR > LR). Bar at the right shows T-values.
Brain regions that showed functional connectivity differences between the low and high risk groups (two sample .
| Regions | L/R | MNI coordinate | Number of voxels | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Angular gyrus | R | 5.40 | 30 | −54 | 36 | 35 |
| Middle frontal gyrus | R | 5.90 | 48 | 33 | 44 | 51 |
| Middle temporal gyrus | R | 6.92 | 48 | −15 | −16 | 18 |
| Anterior cingulate | R | 5.74 | 9 | 30 | 20 | 62 |
| Medial frontal gyrus | R | 5.25 | 3 | 54 | −4 | 15 |
| Inferior parietal lobule | R | 5.47 | 39 | −48 | 60 | 69 |
| Middle frontal gyrus | L | 4.60 | −30 | 45 | 28 | 29 |
| Cerebellum posterior lobe | R | 5.58 | 45 | −63 | −44 | 71 |
| Middle temporal gyrus | L | 5.17 | −51 | −51 | 16 | 21 |
| Supplemental motor area | R | 6.16 | 6 | −6 | 76 | 42 |
Figure 3Directed interactions of the triple networks in two groups. The causal interactions were determined based on the Bayesian network (BN) analysis of the triple networks. The LR group and HR group were found to have the same triple network BN connectivity relationships. The SN plays as an influential hub that mediates the activity of the CEN and DMN in both groups. The numbers on the connections represent the BN connectivity weights between brain networks.