Emily C Edmonds1, Joel Eppig2, Mark W Bondi2, Kelly M Leyden2, Bailey Goodwin2, Lisa Delano-Wood2, Carrie R McDonald2. 1. From the Department of Psychiatry (E.C.E., M.W.B., K.M.L., B.G., L.D.-W., C.R.M.), School of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla; Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology (J.E.), San Diego State University/University of California San Diego; and Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System (M.W.B., L.D.-W.), CA. ecedmonds@ucsd.edu. 2. From the Department of Psychiatry (E.C.E., M.W.B., K.M.L., B.G., L.D.-W., C.R.M.), School of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla; Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology (J.E.), San Diego State University/University of California San Diego; and Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System (M.W.B., L.D.-W.), CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We investigated differences in regional cortical thickness between previously identified empirically derived mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subtypes (amnestic MCI, dysnomic MCI, dysexecutive/mixed MCI, and cluster-derived normal) in order to determine whether these cognitive subtypes would show different patterns of cortical atrophy. METHODS: Participants were 485 individuals diagnosed with MCI and 178 cognitively normal individuals from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Cortical thickness estimates were computed for 32 regions of interest per hemisphere. Statistical group maps compared each MCI subtype to cognitively normal participants and to one another. RESULTS: The pattern of cortical thinning observed in each MCI subtype corresponded to their cognitive profile. No differences in cortical thickness were found between the cluster-derived normal MCI subtype and the cognitively normal group. Direct comparison between MCI subtypes suggested that the cortical thickness patterns reflect increasing disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: There is an ordered pattern of cortical atrophy among patients with MCI that coincides with their profiles of increasing cognitive dysfunction. This heterogeneity is not captured when patients are grouped by conventional diagnostic criteria. Results in the cluster-derived normal group further support the premise that the conventional MCI diagnostic criteria are highly susceptible to false-positive diagnostic errors. Findings suggest a need to (1) improve the diagnostic criteria by reducing reliance on conventional screening measures, rating scales, and a single memory measure in order to avoid false-positive errors; and (2) divide MCI samples into meaningful subgroups based on cognitive and biomarkers profiles-a method that may provide better staging of MCI and inform prognosis.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated differences in regional cortical thickness between previously identified empirically derived mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subtypes (amnestic MCI, dysnomic MCI, dysexecutive/mixed MCI, and cluster-derived normal) in order to determine whether these cognitive subtypes would show different patterns of cortical atrophy. METHODS: Participants were 485 individuals diagnosed with MCI and 178 cognitively normal individuals from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Cortical thickness estimates were computed for 32 regions of interest per hemisphere. Statistical group maps compared each MCI subtype to cognitively normal participants and to one another. RESULTS: The pattern of cortical thinning observed in each MCI subtype corresponded to their cognitive profile. No differences in cortical thickness were found between the cluster-derived normal MCI subtype and the cognitively normal group. Direct comparison between MCI subtypes suggested that the cortical thickness patterns reflect increasing disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: There is an ordered pattern of cortical atrophy among patients with MCI that coincides with their profiles of increasing cognitive dysfunction. This heterogeneity is not captured when patients are grouped by conventional diagnostic criteria. Results in the cluster-derived normal group further support the premise that the conventional MCI diagnostic criteria are highly susceptible to false-positive diagnostic errors. Findings suggest a need to (1) improve the diagnostic criteria by reducing reliance on conventional screening measures, rating scales, and a single memory measure in order to avoid false-positive errors; and (2) divide MCI samples into meaningful subgroups based on cognitive and biomarkers profiles-a method that may provide better staging of MCI and inform prognosis.
Authors: Vivek Singh; Howard Chertkow; Jason P Lerch; Alan C Evans; Adrienne E Dorr; Noor Jehan Kabani Journal: Brain Date: 2006-09-28 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Emily C Edmonds; Lisa Delano-Wood; Lindsay R Clark; Amy J Jak; Daniel A Nation; Carrie R McDonald; David J Libon; Rhoda Au; Douglas Galasko; David P Salmon; Mark W Bondi Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2014-05-22 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Mark W Bondi; Emily C Edmonds; Amy J Jak; Lindsay R Clark; Lisa Delano-Wood; Carrie R McDonald; Daniel A Nation; David J Libon; Rhoda Au; Douglas Galasko; David P Salmon Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2014 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Leslie M Shaw; Hugo Vanderstichele; Malgorzata Knapik-Czajka; Christopher M Clark; Paul S Aisen; Ronald C Petersen; Kaj Blennow; Holly Soares; Adam Simon; Piotr Lewczuk; Robert Dean; Eric Siemers; William Potter; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: L Wang; F C Goldstein; E Veledar; A I Levey; J J Lah; C C Meltzer; C A Holder; H Mao Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-03-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sang Won Seo; Kiho Im; Jong-Min Lee; Yun-Hee Kim; Sung Tae Kim; Seong Yoon Kim; Dong Won Yang; Sun I Kim; Yoon Sun Cho; Duk L Na Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2007-03-13 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Katherine J Bangen; Alexandra L Clark; Madeline Werhane; Emily C Edmonds; Daniel A Nation; Nicole Evangelista; David J Libon; Mark W Bondi; Lisa Delano-Wood Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2016-03-29 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Pradeep Reddy Raamana; Wei Wen; Nicole A Kochan; Henry Brodaty; Perminder S Sachdev; Lei Wang; Mirza Faisal Beg Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Andrea R Zammit; Charles B Hall; David A Bennett; Ali Ezzati; Mindy J Katz; Graciela Muniz-Terrera; Richard B Lipton Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2019-08-13 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Emily C Edmonds; Alexandra J Weigand; Kelsey R Thomas; Joel Eppig; Lisa Delano-Wood; Douglas R Galasko; David P Salmon; Mark W Bondi Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Erik Kaestner; Anny Reyes; Anna Christina Macari; Yu-Hsuan Chang; Brianna M Paul; Bruce P Hermann; Carrie R McDonald Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2019-07-12 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Emily C Edmonds; Carrie R McDonald; Anisa Marshall; Kelsey R Thomas; Joel Eppig; Alexandra J Weigand; Lisa Delano-Wood; Douglas R Galasko; David P Salmon; Mark W Bondi Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2019-02-06 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Mary M Machulda; Emily S Lundt; Sabrina M Albertson; Walter K Kremers; Michelle M Mielke; David S Knopman; Mark W Bondi; Ronald C Petersen Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Kelsey R Thomas; Joel Eppig; Emily C Edmonds; Diane M Jacobs; David J Libon; Rhoda Au; David P Salmon; Mark W Bondi Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Emily C Edmonds; Katherine J Bangen; Lisa Delano-Wood; Daniel A Nation; Ansgar J Furst; David P Salmon; Mark W Bondi Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Kelsey R Thomas; Joel S Eppig; Alexandra J Weigand; Emily C Edmonds; Christina G Wong; Amy J Jak; Lisa Delano-Wood; Douglas R Galasko; David P Salmon; Steven D Edland; Mark W Bondi Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 21.566