| Literature DB >> 30035017 |
Ni Shu1, Yunyun Duan2, Jing Huang3, Zhuoqiong Ren3, Zheng Liu4, Huiqing Dong4, Frederik Barkhof5, Kuncheng Li6, Yaou Liu7.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the rich-club organization in clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) and multiple sclerosis (MS), and to characterize its relationships with physical disabilities and cognitive impairments.Entities:
Keywords: Brain network; CIS, clinically isolated syndrome; Clinically isolated syndrome; DTI, diffusion tensor imaging; Diffusion MRI; EDSS, expanded disability status scale; Graph theory; MMSE, mini-mental state examination; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; MS, multiple sclerosis; Multiple sclerosis; PASAT, paced auditory serial attention test; Rich-club
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30035017 PMCID: PMC6051763 DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.03.034
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neuroimage Clin ISSN: 2213-1582 Impact factor: 4.881
The demographic information and clinical characteristics of all participants.
| Controls | CIS | MS | F/T/χ2/Z value | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 35.0 ± 11.5 | 35.7 ± 10.7 | 34.8 ± 8.3 | 0.08 | 0.92 |
| Gender (F/M) | 23/12 | 26/15 | 24/8 | 1.17 | 0.56 |
| MMSE | 29.1 ± 1.3 | 27.6 ± 1.4 | 25.9 ± 1.8 | 36.44 | <0.001 |
| PASAT2 | 46.7 ± 9.2 | 39.4 ± 7.7 | 35.4 ± 9.8 | 14.14 | <0.001 |
| PASAT3 | 53.9 ± 6.2 | 47.5 ± 7.6 | 41.0 ± 8.7 | 24.38 | <0.001 |
| Disease duration (months) | – | 2.6 ± 2.5 | 41.8 ± 28.7 | 8.73 | <0.001 |
| TWMLL (ml) | – | 4.5 ± 10.6 | 10.3 ± 10.4 | 2.33 | 0.023 |
| EDSS (range) | – | 2.0 (0–6) | 3.5 (0–6.5) | 3.35 | <0.001 |
CIS, clinically isolated syndrome; MS, multiple sclerosis; MMSE = Mini-Mental State Examination; PASAT = Paced Auditory Serial Attention Test; EDSS = Expanded Disability Status Scale; TWMLL = Total White Matter Lesion Load.
Data are shown as mean ± standard deviation, except for EDSS presented in median (range).
P value and F value were obtained using one-way analysis of variance.
P value and T value were obtained using a two-sample t-test.
P value and χ2 value were obtained using the χ2 test.
P value and Z value were obtained using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.
Fig. 1The flowchart of structural network construction. (A) Individual T1 images and H-1024 template were used for automatic parcellation of the brain into 1024 regions, forming the nodes of the individual brain networks. (B) Streamline tractography was applied to the diffusion MRI data to reconstruct the white matter pathways. From the set of reconstructed streamlines, the streamlines that interconnected regions i and j from the set of 1024 regions were taken as an edge between nodes i and j in the structural brain network. The streamline count represents the weight of the connection and was aggregated into a structural connectivity (SC) matrix (C). (D) The matrices and 3D representations (lateral view) of the structural networks of a representative healthy subject are shown in the right panel. The nodes are located according to their centroid stereotaxic coordinates, and the edges are coded according to their connection weights. For details, see the Materials and Methods section.
Fig. S1Group differences in the global network metrics. The bars and error bars represent the mean values and standard deviations of the network properties in each group after removing the effects of age and gender. Significantly reduced strength, global efficiency, local efficiency, clustering and increased shortest path length of the structural networks were observed in both CIS and MS patients relative to the controls (HC). *: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01; ***: p < 0.005.
Fig. 2Rich-club organization of high-resolution brain structural connectome. (A) Hub distribution of structural backbone network across all subjects. Network hubs are represented as nodes in red, with nodal size indicating the degree of the regions. (B) The mean normalized RC coefficient curve under a series of thresholds k for each group. (C) Group differences in the strength of the rich-club, feeder and local connections. The bars and error bars represent the mean values and standard deviations of the connection strength in each group after removing the effects of age and gender. *: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01; ***: p < 0.005.
Fig. 3Disrupted structural connectivity in CIS and MS patients. Connected components showing decreased structural connectivity were identified between CIS vs. controls, MS vs. CIS and MS vs. controls (HC) (p < 0.05, corrected). The nodes and connections were mapped onto the cortical surfaces using in-house BrainNet viewer software. The nodes in red represent the hub regions of the backbone network.
Fig. 4Correlations between the rich-club metrics and clinical variables in patients with MS. (A) Plots showing the linear correlation between altered rich-club connection strength with PASAT2, PASAT3 and MMSE scores in MS patients (all p < 0.05, corrected). (B) Plots showing the linear correlation between altered feeder connection strength with PASAT3 score in MS patients. (C) Plots showing the linear correlation between altered local connection strength with PASAT3 score in MS patients. The red dots represent the adjusted values of MS patients after controlling for age and gender.
Fig. S2Reproducibility of the rich-club organization in L-AAL network. (A) Hub distribution of structural backbone network across all subjects. Network hubs are represented with nodes in red, with nodal size indicating the degree of the regions. (B) Mean normalized RC coefficient curve under a series of thresholds k for each group. (C) Group differences in the strength of the rich-club, feeder and local connections. The bars and error bars represent the mean values and standard deviations of the connection strength in each group after removing the effects of age and gender. *: p < 0.05; **: p < 0.01; ***: p < 0.005.