Chunhua Zhang1, Min Kong2, Hongchun Wei1, Hua Zhang3, Guozhao Ma4, Maowen Ba1. 1. Department of Neurology, the Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai 264000, China. 2. Department of Neurology, Yantaishan Hospital, Yantai 264000, China. 3. Department of Neurology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400016, China. 4. Department of Neurology, East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200120, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Apolipoprotein E (ApoE) ε 4 has been identified as the strongest genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the importance of ApoE ε 4 on clinical and biological heterogeneity of AD is still to be determined, particularly at the prodromal stage. Here, we evaluate the association of ApoE ε 4 with clinical cognition and neuroimaging regions in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) participants based on the AT (N) system, which is increasingly essential for developing a precise assessment of AD. METHODS: We stratified 178 A+T+MCI participants (prodromal AD) into ApoE ε 4 (+) and ApoE ε 4 (-) according to ApoE genotype from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). We determined Aβ-positivity (A+) by the standardized uptake values ratios (SUVR) means of florbetapir-PET-AV45 (the cut-off value of 1.1) and fibrillar tau-positivity (T+) by cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) phosphorylated-tau at threonine 181 position (p-Tau) (cut-off value of 23 pg/mL). We evaluated the effect of ApoE ε 4 status on cognitive conditions and brain atrophy from structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. A multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare the differences of cognitive scores and brain atrophy from structural MRI regions of interest (ROIs) between both groups. Furthermore, we performed a linear regression model to assess the correlation between signature ROIs of structural MRI and cognitive scores in the prodromal AD participants. RESULTS: ApoE ε 4 (+) prodromal AD participants had lower levels of CSF Aβ 1-42, higher levels of t-Tau, more memory and global cognitive impairment, and faster decline of global cognition, compared to ApoE ε 4 (-) prodromal AD. ApoE ε 4 (+) prodromal AD participants had a thinner cortical thickness of bilateral entorhinal, smaller subcortical volume of the left amygdala, bilateral hippocampus, and left ventral diencephalon (DC) relative to ApoE ε 4 (-) prodromal AD. Furthermore, the cortical thickness average of bilateral entorhinal was highly correlated with memory and global cognition. CONCLUSIONS: ApoE ε 4 status in prodromal AD participants has an important effect on clinical cognitive domains. After ascertaining the ApoE ε 4 status, specific MRI regions can be correlated to the cognitive domain and will be helpful for precise assessment in prodromal AD. 2020 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Apolipoprotein E (ApoE) ε 4 has been identified as the strongest genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the importance of ApoE ε 4 on clinical and biological heterogeneity of AD is still to be determined, particularly at the prodromal stage. Here, we evaluate the association of ApoE ε 4 with clinical cognition and neuroimaging regions in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) participants based on the AT (N) system, which is increasingly essential for developing a precise assessment of AD. METHODS: We stratified 178 A+T+MCI participants (prodromal AD) into ApoE ε 4 (+) and ApoE ε 4 (-) according to ApoE genotype from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). We determined Aβ-positivity (A+) by the standardized uptake values ratios (SUVR) means of florbetapir-PET-AV45 (the cut-off value of 1.1) and fibrillar tau-positivity (T+) by cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) phosphorylated-tau at threonine 181 position (p-Tau) (cut-off value of 23 pg/mL). We evaluated the effect of ApoE ε 4 status on cognitive conditions and brain atrophy from structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. A multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare the differences of cognitive scores and brain atrophy from structural MRI regions of interest (ROIs) between both groups. Furthermore, we performed a linear regression model to assess the correlation between signature ROIs of structural MRI and cognitive scores in the prodromal AD participants. RESULTS: ApoE ε 4 (+) prodromal AD participants had lower levels of CSF Aβ 1-42, higher levels of t-Tau, more memory and global cognitive impairment, and faster decline of global cognition, compared to ApoE ε 4 (-) prodromal AD. ApoE ε 4 (+) prodromal AD participants had a thinner cortical thickness of bilateral entorhinal, smaller subcortical volume of the left amygdala, bilateral hippocampus, and left ventral diencephalon (DC) relative to ApoE ε 4 (-) prodromal AD. Furthermore, the cortical thickness average of bilateral entorhinal was highly correlated with memory and global cognition. CONCLUSIONS: ApoE ε 4 status in prodromal AD participants has an important effect on clinical cognitive domains. After ascertaining the ApoE ε 4 status, specific MRI regions can be correlated to the cognitive domain and will be helpful for precise assessment in prodromal AD. 2020 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
Authors: Marilyn S Albert; Steven T DeKosky; Dennis Dickson; Bruno Dubois; Howard H Feldman; Nick C Fox; Anthony Gamst; David M Holtzman; William J Jagust; Ronald C Petersen; Peter J Snyder; Maria C Carrillo; Bill Thies; Creighton H Phelps Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2011-04-21 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Ziad S Nasreddine; Natalie A Phillips; Valérie Bédirian; Simon Charbonneau; Victor Whitehead; Isabelle Collin; Jeffrey L Cummings; Howard Chertkow Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Lieke L Smits; Yolande A L Pijnenburg; Annelies E van der Vlies; Esther L G E Koedam; Femke H Bouwman; Ilona E W Reuling; Philip Scheltens; Wiesje M van der Flier Journal: Eur Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 4.600
Authors: Leslie M Shaw; Hugo Vanderstichele; Malgorzata Knapik-Czajka; Christopher M Clark; Paul S Aisen; Ronald C Petersen; Kaj Blennow; Holly Soares; Adam Simon; Piotr Lewczuk; Robert Dean; Eric Siemers; William Potter; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Angela K Troyer; Kelly J Murphy; Nicole D Anderson; Fergus I M Craik; Morris Moscovitch; Andrea Maione; Fuqiang Gao Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 2012-10-24 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: David A Wolk; Julie C Price; Judy A Saxton; Beth E Snitz; Jeffrey A James; Oscar L Lopez; Howard J Aizenstein; Ann D Cohen; Lisa A Weissfeld; Chester A Mathis; William E Klunk; Steven T De-Kosky; Steven T DeKoskym Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Kristin R Wildsmith; Monica Holley; Julie C Savage; Rebecca Skerrett; Gary E Landreth Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2013-07-12 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Maria-Eleni Dounavi; Coco Newton; Natalie Jenkins; Elijah Mak; Audrey Low; Graciela Muniz-Terrera; Guy B Williams; Brian Lawlor; Lorina Naci; Paresh Malhotra; Clare E Mackay; Ivan Koychev; Karen Ritchie; Craig W Ritchie; Li Su; John T O'Brien Journal: J Neurol Date: 2022-03-13 Impact factor: 6.682