| Literature DB >> 28984583 |
Miranda Tuwaig1,2, Mélissa Savard1, Benoît Jutras3,4, Judes Poirier1,2, D Louis Collins1,2, Pedro Rosa-Neto1,2, David Fontaine1, John C S Breitner1,2.
Abstract
Prevention of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (d/AD) requires interventions that slow the disease process prior to symptom onset. To develop such interventions, one needs metrics that assess pre-symptomatic disease progression. Familiar measures of progression include cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biochemical and imaging analyses, as well as cognitive testing. Changes in the latter can sometimes be difficult to distinguish from effects of "normal" aging. A different approach involves testing of "central auditory processing" (CAP), which enables comprehension of auditory stimuli amidst a distracting background (e.g., conversation in a noisy bar or restaurant). Such comprehension is often impaired in d/AD. Similarly, effortful or diminished auditory comprehension is sometimes reported by cognitively healthy elders, raising the possibility that CAP deficit may be a marker of pre-symptomatic AD. In 187 cognitively and physically healthy members of the aging, AD family history-positive PREVENT-AD cohort, we therefore evaluated whether CAP deficits were associated with known markers of AD neurodegeneration. Such markers included CSF tau concentrations and magnetic resonance imaging volumetric and cortical thickness measures in key AD-related regions. Adjusting for age, sex, education, pure-tone hearing, and APOEɛ4 status, we observed a persistent relationship between CAP scores and CSF tau levels, entorhinal and hippocampal cortex volumes, cortical thickness, and deficits in cognition (Repeatable Battery for Assessment of Neuropsychological Status total score, and several of its index scales). These cross-sectional observations suggest that CAP may serve as a novel metric for pre-symptomatic AD pathogenesis. They are therefore being followed up longitudinally with larger samples.Entities:
Keywords: Biomarkers; central auditory processing disorder; cognitive function; pre-clinical Alzheimer’s disease; prevention; sensorineural assessment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28984583 PMCID: PMC5757649 DOI: 10.3233/JAD-170545
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Alzheimers Dis ISSN: 1387-2877 Impact factor: 4.472
Sample characteristics
| Total Sample ( | |
| Age, y (s.d.) | 64.05 (5.15) |
| Education, y (s.d.) | 14.89 (3.15) |
| Gender, M/F | 48/139 |
| 70/117 | |
| Tone test, pass/fail | 49/138 |
| SSI-ICM, mean (s.d.) | 7.14 (2.07) |
| DSI-WES, mean (s.d.) | 7.78 (2.09) |
| DSI-REA, mean (s.d.) | +1.26 (2.38) |
| RBANSTOTAL, mean (s.d.) | 101.36 (11.13) |
Robust-fit linear regression models of covariates as predictors of three CAP test scores
| Covariate | SSI-ICM | DSI-WES | DSI-REA | |||||||||
| β | SE | tStat | β | SE | tStat | β | SE | tStat | ||||
| Tone test | 0.261 | 0.326 | 0.801 | 0.424 | 0.050 | 0.346 | 0.143 | 0.886 | 0.050 | 0.374 | 0.133 | 0.894 |
| Gender | 0.841 | 0.321 | 2.62 | 1.012 | 0.330 | 3.06 | –1.225 | 0.361 | –3.39 | |||
| 0.445 | 0.280 | 1.59 | 0.114 | 0.320 | 0.292 | 1.10 | 0.274 | 0.014 | 0.319 | 0.043 | 0.965 | |
| Education | 0.124 | 0.041 | 3.01 | 0.176 | 0.044 | 4.04 | –0.108 | 0.048 | –2.25 | |||
| Age | –0.144 | 0.026 | –5.50 | –0.115 | 0.026 | –4.39 | 0.078 | 0.028 | 2.74 | |||
Table 2 provides results from three robust-fit multiple linear regression models (one for each CAP test). Estimated β coefficients with standard error (SE) are shown for each test. tStat shows the t-value for each variate, with corresponding p-value. There was no adjustment for multiple comparisons. Statistically significant terms for each test are in bold. All three tests were related to gender, education, and age. Neither APOE ɛ4 status nor tone test performance was associated significantly with any CAP test score.
Robust-fit linear regression models of RBANSTOTAL and Index subscores as predictors of three CAP test scores
| RBANS result | SSI-ICM | DSI-WES | DSI-REA | |||||||||
| β | SE | tStat | β | SE | tStat | β | SE | tStat | ||||
| Immediate Memory | 0.009 | 0.013 | 0.705 | 0.482 | 0.047 | 0.012 | 3.881 | –0.029 | 0.014 | –2.009 | ||
| Delayed Memory | 0.014 | 0.018 | 0.821 | 0.413 | 0.055 | 0.017 | 3.188 | –0.036 | 0.020 | –1.780 | 0.077 | |
| Attention | 0.027 | 0.008 | 3.277 | 0.030 | 0.008 | 3.618 | –0.019 | 0.010 | –1.911 | 0.058 | ||
| Language | 0.005 | 0.015 | 0.358 | 0.721 | 0.040 | 0.015 | 2.697 | –0.046 | 0.017 | –2.706 | ||
| Visuospatial- | ||||||||||||
| Construction | 0.004 | 0.010 | 0.399 | 0.691 | 0.022 | 0.010 | 2.176 | 0.007 | 0.011 | 0.597 | 0.551 | |
| RBANSTOTAL | 0.029 | 0.013 | 2.240 | 0.065 | 0.012 | 5.337 | –0.034 | 0.015 | –2.252 | |||
Table 3 shows results from robust-fit linear regression models of five RBANS index subscores as well as RBANSTOTAL score with adjustment for age, education, gender, APOE ɛ4 status, and tone test performance. Statistically significant terms are shown in bold. DSI-WES score was predicted significantly by all RBANS index scores, while DSI-REA showed significant or trend-level relationships to all scores except the visuospatial-construction subscore. The SSI-ICM was related only to the attention subscore. All three tests showed significant association with RBANSTOTAL score.
Robust-fit linear regression models of CSF AD biomarkers as predictors of three CAP test scores
| Biomarker Measure | SSI-ICM | DSI-WES | DSI-REA | |||||||||
| β | SE | tStat | β | SE | tStat | β | SE | tStat | ||||
| Aβ42 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 1.593 | 0.117 | 6.76e-5 | 0.001 | 0.064 | 0.949 | 3e-4 | 0.001 | 0.301 | 0.764 |
| total-tau | 3e-4 | 0.001 | 0.260 | 0.796 | –0.003 | 0.002 | –1.828 | 0.073 | 0.004 | 0.002 | 2.161 | |
| P-tau | 0.003 | 0.011 | 0.265 | 0.792 | –0.023 | 0.014 | –1.629 | 0.109 | 0.031 | 0.015 | 2.095 | |
| total-tau/Aβ42 | –0.164 | 0.856 | –0.192 | 0.849 | –1.539 | 1.034 | –1.489 | 0.142 | 1.820 | 1.132 | 1.608 | 0.113 |
| P-tau/Aβ42 | –3.337 | 7.686 | –0.434 | 0.666 | –12.602 | 9.113 | –1.383 | 0.172 | 14.133 | 9.967 | 1.418 | 0.162 |
As before, models were adjusted for age, education, gender, APOE ɛ4 status, and tone test performance. DSI-REA was predicted significantly by total-tau and P-tau levels and showed trends toward association with the ratios of total-tau or P-tau to Aβ42. DSI-WES showed a suggestive relationship to several biomarkers, with the notable exception of Aβ42, which appeared unrelated to any CAP test score.
Robust-fit linear regression of several imaging volumetric measures as predictors of three CAP test scores
| Volumetric Measure | SSI-ICM | DSI-WES | DSI-REA | |||||||||
| β | SE | tStat | β | SE | tStat | β | SE | tStat | ||||
| Hc, L | –0.273 | 0.254 | –0.076 | 0.284 | –0.067 | 0.258 | –0.260 | 0.795 | –0.502 | 0.282 | –1.782 | 0.077 |
| Hc, R | –0.342 | 0.253 | –1.350 | 0.179 | –0.039 | 0.260 | –0.148 | 0.882 | –0.396 | 0.282 | –1.403 | 0.163 |
| EC, L | –0.001 | 0.002 | –0.447 | 0.655 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.641 | 0.522 | –0.006 | 0.003 | –2.168 | |
| EC, R | –0.002 | 0.003 | –0.601 | 0.549 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 1.005 | 0.316 | –0.006 | 0.003 | –1.703 | 0.090 |
Table 5 shows results of multiple linear regression models as before, with predictor variables now being volume measures for four regions of interest. Hc, hippocampus; EC, entorhinal cortex; L, left; R, right. Models were again adjusted for age, education, gender, APOE ɛ4 status, and tone test performance, but not for multiple comparisons. Among the three CAP tests, only DSI-REA showed suggestive (trend) association with volumetric measures.
Fig.1Whole brain cortical thickness measures associated with SSI-ICM. The figure displays a color map representing results of whole brain random-field theory cortical thickness analysis. The images, in sequence from top left, show left-lateral, dorsal, right-lateral, left-mesial, ventral, and right-mesial views, while the lower images show coronal views from rostral (left) and caudal (right) perspectives. Analyses adjusted for age, gender, education, APOE ɛ4 status, and tone test. The adjusted SSI-ICM score displayed a positive relationship with right Heschl’s gyrus at the peak level (indicated by red colored point). SSI-ICM score showed a positive relationship with thickness of the left and right precuneus, with extension to adjacent inferior parietal and occipital cortices. Also of interest are positive associations with right parahippocampal and entorhinal cortices, as well as left inferior and mid temporal gyri. All these areas are displayed as blue colored areas and are statistically significant as clusters.
Fig.2Whole brain cortical thickness measures associated with DSI-REA. Color map showing association of DSI-REA score with cortical thickness estimated using whole brain random-field theory analysis. The different image perspectives are as explained in Fig. 1. After adjustment for age, gender, education, APOE ɛ4 status, and tone test, DSI-REA score (representing presumed degeneration of transcortical auditory pathways) showed an inverse relationship with thickness of the right dorsomedial and inferior frontal cortices, as indicated in pale blue. Also shown are associations with thickness of left superior and transverse temporal cortices as well as bilateral inferior temporal gyri, right anterior temporal pole, and right precuneus. Analyses are significant at the cluster level, as shown. No significant peaks are observed.