| Literature DB >> 30704519 |
Omar A Halawa1, Jennifer R Gatchel1,2,3, Rebecca E Amariglio1,4,5,6,7, Dorene M Rentz1,4,5,6,7, Reisa A Sperling1,4,5,6, Keith A Johnson1,8,5,6, Gad A Marshall9,10,11,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A decline in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) correlates with the progression from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia and has been associated with frontal and parietal hypometabolism, lower cerebrospinal fluid amyloid β1-42, and inferior temporal cortical thinning. Identifying the underlying biomarkers of functional decline will allow for the early identification of individuals at risk of disease progression.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; Amyloid; Entorhinal cortex; Inferior temporal cortex; Instrumental activities of daily living; Mild cognitive impairment; Positron emission tomography; Tau
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30704519 PMCID: PMC6357436 DOI: 10.1186/s13195-019-0471-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Impact factor: 6.982
Participant demographic and neuropsychological testing characteristics
| Diagnosis | All | CN | MCI/AD |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 90 | 51 | 39 |
| Age (years) | 76.3 ± 6.9 | 74.5 ± 6.1 | 78.6 ± 7.3 |
| Gender (% female) | 56.7 | 49.0 | 66.7 |
| Education (years) | 16.3 ± 2.6 | 16.2 ± 2.3 | 16.4 ± 3.0 |
| AMNART IQ | 118.5 ± 9.8 | 120.0 ± 7.9 | 116.0 ± 11.7 |
| MMSE | 27.8 ± 3.3 | 29.0 ± 1.2 | 26.0 ± 4.4 |
| RAVLT total learning | 41.4 ± 13.9 | 48.0 ± 10.7 | 33.0 ± 13.4 |
| FAQ | 3.2 ± 6.4 | 0.4 ± 1.6 | 7.0 ± 8.2 |
| Amyloid status (% amyloid-positive) | 34.6 | 22.9 | 54.5* |
| Entorhinal Cortex FTP SUVR | 1.17 ± 0.21 | 1.13 ± 0.17 | 1.24 ± 0.23 |
| Inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR | 1.26 ± 0.26 | 1.20 ± 0.17 | 1.33 ± 0.33 |
| Mean cortical florbetapir SUVR | 1.37 ± 0.27 | 1.31 ± 0.22 | 1.4 ± 0.3 |
*MCI 40% amyloid-positive, AD dementia 100% amyloid-positive
Fig. 1Scatter plot of entorhinal cortex FTP SUVR versus FAQ in CN, MCI, and AD dementia participants, stratified by amyloid status (Aβ+, florbetapir SUVR ≥ 1.40; Aβ−, florbetapir SUVR < 1.40)
Fig. 2Scatter plot of inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR versus FAQ in CN, MCI, and AD dementia participants, stratified by amyloid status (Aβ+, florbetapir SUVR ≥ 1.40; Aβ−, florbetapir SUVR < 1.40)
Results of separate primary regression models (dependent variable: FAQ; independent variables: entorhinal cortex FTP SUVR, inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR, florbetapir SUVR, EC FTP*florbetapir, IT FTP*florbetapir, age, RAVLT total learning, AMNART IQ)
| FAQ | ||
|---|---|---|
| EC tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.47 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| IT tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.54 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| Amyloid | Partial | 0.44 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| EC tau | Partial | 0.39 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| IT tau | Partial | 0.45 |
|
| < 0.001 |
Results of separate secondary regression models (dependent variable: FAQ; independent variables: entorhinal cortex FTP SUVR, inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR, florbetapir SUVR, EC FTP*florbetapir, IT FTP*florbetapir, age, MMSE, AMNART IQ)
| FAQ | ||
|---|---|---|
| EC tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.35 |
|
| 0.002 | |
| IT tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.38 |
|
| 0.001 | |
| Amyloid | Partial | 0.41 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| EC tau | Partial | 0.22 |
|
| 0.041 | |
| IT tau | Partial | 0.22 |
|
| 0.046 |
Results of separate secondary regression models (dependent variable: FAQ; independent variables: entorhinal cortex FTP SUVR, inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR, florbetapir SUVR, EC FTP*florbetapir, IT FTP*florbetapir, age, RAVLT, AMNART IQ, diagnosis)
| FAQ | ||
|---|---|---|
| EC tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.44 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| IT tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.5 |
|
| < 0.001 |
Fig. 3Scatter plot of entorhinal cortex FTP SUVR versus FAQ in CN, MCI, and AD dementia participants, stratified by the diagnostic group (CN, MCI/AD)
Fig. 4Scatter plot of inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR versus FAQ in CN, MCI, and AD dementia participants, stratified by the diagnostic group (CN, MCI/AD)
Results of separate secondary regression models in CN participants (dependent variable: FAQ; independent variables: entorhinal cortex FTP SUVR, inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR, florbetapir SUVR, EC FTP*florbetapir, IT FTP*florbetapir, age, RAVLT, AMNART IQ)
| FAQ | ||
|---|---|---|
| EC tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.219 |
| p | 0.164 | |
| IT tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.092 |
|
| 0.567 | |
| EC tau | Partial | 0.069 |
|
| 0.64 | |
| IT tau | Partial | 0.072 |
|
| 0.629 |
Results of separate secondary regression models in MCI/AD dementia participants (dependent variable: FAQ; independent variables: entorhinal cortex FTP SUVR, inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR, florbetapir SUVR, EC FTP*florbetapir, IT FTP*florbetapir, age, RAVLT, AMNART IQ)
| FAQ | ||
|---|---|---|
| EC tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.61 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| IT tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.64 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| EC tau | Partial | 0.52 |
|
| 0.001 | |
| IT tau | Partial | 0.54 |
|
| 0.001 |
Results of separate secondary regression models in amyloid-positive participants (dependent variable: FAQ; independent variables: entorhinal cortex FTP SUVR, inferior temporal cortex FTP SUVR, florbetapir SUVR, EC FTP*florbetapir, IT FTP*florbetapir, age, RAVLT, AMNART IQ)
| FAQ | ||
|---|---|---|
| EC tau × amyloid | Partial | 0.39 |
|
| 0.05 | |
| IT tau × amyloid | Partial | – |
|
| > 0.1 | |
| EC tau | Partial | 0.39 |
|
| < 0.001 | |
| IT tau | Partial | 0.45 |
|
| < 0.001 |