BACKGROUND: While acceleration in age-related cerebral atrophy has been well documented in Alzheimer's disease, the cerebellar contributions to this effect have not been thoroughly investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated cerebellar volume and atrophy rate using magnetic resonance imaging in individuals with normal cognition (CN), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Two hundred twenty-nine CN, 398 MCI and 191 AD participants of stage I ADNI database with screening scans were evaluated for cerebellar volume. Of those, 758 individuals with two or more follow-up scans were categorized into stable, converted, and reverted CN, MCI and AD and evaluated for cerebellar atrophy rate. RESULTS: Cerebellar volume was 2.5% larger in CN than in those with AD but there were no differences between CN and MCI and MCI and AD in cross-sectional analysis. Similarly, the atrophy rate was 49% larger in AD and 64% larger in MCI who converted to AD but no difference was detected between CN and MCI. There were no association between education and APOEe4 and cerebellar volume or cerebellar atrophy across the diagnostic groups. CONCLUSION: Cerebellar atrophy contributes to Alzheimer's clinical progression but mostly at the late stage of the disease. However, even in the late stage shrinkage rate is less than the average of the shrinkage in the cerebrum and is not associated with AD moderators. This suggests that cerebellar involvement is secondary to cerebral involvement and can be due to network connection spread regardless of the primary pathology. Hum Brain Mapp, 2017.
BACKGROUND: While acceleration in age-related cerebral atrophy has been well documented in Alzheimer's disease, the cerebellar contributions to this effect have not been thoroughly investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated cerebellar volume and atrophy rate using magnetic resonance imaging in individuals with normal cognition (CN), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Two hundred twenty-nine CN, 398 MCI and 191 ADparticipants of stage I ADNI database with screening scans were evaluated for cerebellar volume. Of those, 758 individuals with two or more follow-up scans were categorized into stable, converted, and reverted CN, MCI and AD and evaluated for cerebellar atrophy rate. RESULTS: Cerebellar volume was 2.5% larger in CN than in those with AD but there were no differences between CN and MCI and MCI and AD in cross-sectional analysis. Similarly, the atrophy rate was 49% larger in AD and 64% larger in MCI who converted to AD but no difference was detected between CN and MCI. There were no association between education and APOEe4 and cerebellar volume or cerebellar atrophy across the diagnostic groups. CONCLUSION:Cerebellar atrophy contributes to Alzheimer's clinical progression but mostly at the late stage of the disease. However, even in the late stage shrinkage rate is less than the average of the shrinkage in the cerebrum and is not associated with AD moderators. This suggests that cerebellar involvement is secondary to cerebral involvement and can be due to network connection spread regardless of the primary pathology. Hum Brain Mapp, 2017.
Authors: Yoo Young Hoogendam; Jos N van der Geest; Fedde van der Lijn; Aad van der Lugt; Wiro J Niessen; Gabriel P Krestin; Albert Hofman; Meike W Vernooij; Monique M B Breteler; M Arfan Ikram Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2012-03-08 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Brian J Lopresti; William E Klunk; Chester A Mathis; Jessica A Hoge; Scott K Ziolko; Xueling Lu; Carolyn C Meltzer; Kurt Schimmel; Nicholas D Tsopelas; Steven T DeKosky; Julie C Price Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Cindy W Yoon; Sang Won Seo; Jun-Sung Park; Ki-Chang Kwak; Uicheul Yoon; Mee Kyung Suh; Geon Ha Kim; Ji Soo Shin; Chi Hun Kim; Young Noh; Hanna Cho; Min-Jeong Kim; Jong Hun Kim; Jee Hoon Roh; Jong-Min Lee; Duk L Na Journal: Cerebellum Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.847
Authors: Philipp A Thomann; Christine Schläfer; Ulrich Seidl; Vasco Dos Santos; Marco Essig; Johannes Schröder Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2008-01-22 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Ira Driscoll; Juan C Troncoso; Gay Rudow; Jitka Sojkova; Olga Pletnikova; Yun Zhou; Michael A Kraut; Luigi Ferrucci; Chester A Mathis; William E Klunk; Richard J O'Brien; Christos Davatzikos; Dean F Wong; Susan M Resnick Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2012-08-05 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Christiane Möller; Hugo Vrenken; Lize Jiskoot; Adriaan Versteeg; Frederik Barkhof; Philip Scheltens; Wiesje M van der Flier Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: C C Rowe; S Ng; U Ackermann; S J Gong; K Pike; G Savage; T F Cowie; K L Dickinson; P Maruff; D Darby; C Smith; M Woodward; J Merory; H Tochon-Danguy; G O'Keefe; W E Klunk; C A Mathis; J C Price; C L Masters; V L Villemagne Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-05-15 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Keith A Shaughnessy; Kyle J Hackney; Brian C Clark; William J Kraemer; Donna J Terbizan; Ryan R Bailey; Ryan McGrath Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2020 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Linda H G Pagen; Vincent G van de Ven; Ed H B M Gronenschild; Nikos Priovoulos; Frans R J Verhey; Heidi I L Jacobs Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2020 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Karine Provost; Renaud La Joie; Amelia Strom; Leonardo Iaccarino; Lauren Edwards; Taylor J Mellinger; Julie Pham; Suzanne L Baker; Bruce L Miller; William J Jagust; Gil D Rabinovici Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 6.200