| Literature DB >> 30528369 |
Yuanchao Zhang1, Ting Qiu1, Xinru Yuan1, Jinlei Zhang1, Yue Wang1, Na Zhang2, Chaoyang Zhou3, Chunxia Luo4, Jiuquan Zhang5.
Abstract
Neuroimaging studies of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have shown widespread alterations in structure, function, and connectivity in both motor and non-motor brain regions, suggesting multi-systemic neurobiological abnormalities that might impact large-scale brain networks. Here, we examined the alterations in the topological organization of structural covariance networks of ALS patients (N = 60) compared with normal controls (N = 60). We found that structural covariance networks of ALS patients showed a consistent rearrangement towards a regularized architecture evidenced by increased path length, clustering coefficient, small-world index, and modularity, as well as decreased global efficiency, suggesting inefficient global integration and increased local segregation. Locally, ALS patients showed decreased nodal degree and betweenness in the gyrus rectus and/or Heschl's gyrus, and increased betweenness in the supplementary motor area, triangular part of the inferior frontal gyrus, supramarginal gyrus and posterior cingulate cortex. In addition, we identified a different number and distribution of hubs in ALS patients, showing more frontal and subcortical hubs than in normal controls. In conclusion, we reveal abnormal topological organization of structural covariance networks in ALS patients, and provide network-level evidence for the concept that ALS is a multisystem disorder with a cerebral involvement extending beyond the motor areas.Entities:
Keywords: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis; Gray matter volume; Modularity; Small-world; Structural covariance network
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30528369 PMCID: PMC6411656 DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.101619
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neuroimage Clin ISSN: 2213-1582 Impact factor: 4.881
Demographic data of the participants.
| ALS patients (N = 60) | Normal controls ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean Age in Years (range) | 48.77(26–69) | 48.15(24–70) | 0.73 |
| Male/female | 39/21 | 39/21 | 1.00 |
| Education Level in Years (range) | 12.2 (5–18) | 12.7 (6–19) | 0.48 |
| MoCA Score (range) | 27.38 (26–30) | 27.63 (26–30) | 0.29 |
| Limb/bulbar/both onset | 47/12/1 | – | – |
| Classic/LMN-D/UMN-D/PLS/PMA | 43/7/7/2/1 | – | – |
| Mean Disease Duration in Months (range) | 21.05(2−132) | – | – |
| Mean ALSFRS-R (range) | 32.62(16–45) | – | – |
| Mean Disease Progression Rate (range) | 1.36(0.02–6.50) | – | – |
MoCA = Montreal Cognitive Assessment; The ALS patients were subdivided into 5 phenotypes: classic, lower motor neuron dominant (LMN-D), upper motor neuron dominant (UMN-D), primary lateral sclerosis (PLS) and progressive muscular atrophy (PMA).
Fig. 1Correlation and binary adjacency matrices for normal controls (NC) and ALS patients. Correlation matrices for (A) NC and (B) ALS patients, and binary adjacency matrices thresholded at Dmin for (C) NC and (D) ALS patients. The color bar denotes the correlation coefficient and represents the strength of the connections.
Fig. 2Changes in global network parameters as a function of network density. (A) normalized path length, (B) normalized clustering coefficient, (C) small-world index, (D) global efficiency, (E) local efficiency and (F) modularity in normal controls (NC) and ALS patients.
Fig. 3Differences between normal controls (NC) and ALS patients in global network parameters as a function of network density. The 95% confidence interval and group differences in (A) normalized path length, (B) normalized clustering coefficient, (C) small-world index, (D) global efficiency, (E) local efficiency and (F) modularity. The * marker denotes the difference between NC and ALS patients; the * signs lying outside of the confidence intervals indicate the density where the difference is significant at P < .05. The positive values indicate ALS patients > NC and negative values indicate ALS patients < NC.
Fig. 4Brain modules in normal controls (NC) and ALS patients. (A) Four modules were identified in NC and (B) six modules were identified in ALS patients.
Fig. 5Differences between normal controls (NC) and ALS patients in regional network parameters. Regions that showed significant differences between ALS patients and NC in regional degree (A) and regional betweenness (B) for networks thresholded at minimum density. The color bar indicates log(1/P). Warm colors denote regions with significantly higher nodal degree or betweenness in ALS patients than in NC, while cool colors denote regions with significantly higher nodal degree or betweenness in NC than in ALS patients.
Fig. 6Network hubs in normal controls (NC) and ALS patients. (A) Seven network hubs (cortical) were identified in NC and (B) 11 network hubs (cortical and subcortical) were identified in ALS patients.