| Literature DB >> 30480235 |
Milos Dordevic1,2, Alessa Müller-Fotti1, Patrick Müller1, Marlen Schmicker1, Jörn Kaufmann2, Notger G Müller1,2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies using neuromelanin-sensitive-MRI have established the locus coeruleus (LC)-to-pons intensity ratio as a biomarker for diagnosis of Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases. More detailed analysis is needed for exploiting the highest clinical potential of this technique.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; biomarker; locus coeruleus; magnetic resonance imaging; neuromelanin
Year: 2017 PMID: 30480235 PMCID: PMC6159723 DOI: 10.3233/ADR-170021
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Rep ISSN: 2542-4823
Fig. 1Example of locations of measured slices in rostral-caudal direction (upper left corner) and of the reference slice (R-slice) and the five slices (1 through 5) measured in one healthy control participant. Green arrows point to areas of signal increase. Orange zones depict masked areas used to extract signal intensities from corresponding locus coerulei (LC) and reference zones.
Intensity ratios for 5 subsequent slices for each side in both patient and control groups; bolded – the highest values
| Side | Slice | Distance | Controls | Patients | Average |
| below R-slice | average | average | difference/ | ||
| (mm) | intensity ratio | intensity ratio | % difference | ||
| Left | 1 | 2.5 | 1,008 | 0,988 | 0,020 / 2.0% |
| 2 | 5 | 1,034 | 1,028 | 0,006 / 0.6% | |
| 5 | 12.5 | 1,028 | 0,999 | 0,029 / 2.9% | |
| Right | 1 | 2.5 | 1,042 | 1,046 | –0,004 / 0.4% |
| 2 | 5 | 1,071 | 1,082 | –0,011 / 1.1% | |
| 5 | 12.5 | 1,103 | 1,052 | 0,051 / 5.1% |
Difference in intensity ratios between patients and controls on each side for the two slices; *p < 0.05. C, controls; P, patients; 1, first tomographic slice; 2, second tomographic slice
| Side | Comparison | Average | Difference confidence | Effect | |
| difference | interval to 95% | size (d) | |||
| Left | C1 versus P1 | 6.1% | –0.8% to 13% | 0.831 | 0.080 |
| C2 versus P2 | 12.3% | 5% to 19.6% | 1.577 | 0.003* | |
| Right | C1 versus P1 | 6.6% | 0.5% to 12.7% | 1.023 | 0.034* |
| C2 versus P2 | 6.2% | –0.6% to 13% | 0.856 | 0.072 |
Fig.2Difference in intensity ratios between patients and controls for each side on the two slices. C, controls; P, patients; 1, first tomographic slice; 2, second tomographic slice.
Fig.3Intensity ratios for each participant and each slice; C, controls; P, patients; 1, first tomographic slice; 2, second tomographic slice.
Values from receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis for each side on the two slices; bolded – the highest values
| Side | Slice | Area under | 95% confidence |
| curve | interval | ||
| Left | C1 versus P1 | 0.74 | 0.514–0.966 |
| Right | C1 versus P1 | 0.79 | 0.583–0.997 |
| C2 versus P2 | 0.78 | 0.560–1 |
Fig.4Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve (in red) for C2 versus P2.