| Literature DB >> 33172499 |
Sophie Lemmens1,2,3, Toon Van Craenendonck4, Jan Van Eijgen5,6,4, Lies De Groef7, Rose Bruffaerts8,9, Danilo Andrade de Jesus6, Wouter Charle10, Murali Jayapala10, Gordana Sunaric-Mégevand11, Arnout Standaert4, Jan Theunis4, Karel Van Keer5,6, Mathieu Vandenbulcke12, Lieve Moons7, Rik Vandenberghe8,9,13, Patrick De Boever4,14,15, Ingeborg Stalmans5,6.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The eye offers potential for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) with retinal imaging techniques being explored to quantify amyloid accumulation and aspects of neurodegeneration. To assess these changes, this proof-of-concept study combined hyperspectral imaging and optical coherence tomography to build a classification model to differentiate between AD patients and controls.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; Amyloid-beta (Aβ); Biomarker; Brain; Cognitive impairment; Hyperspectral imaging; Machine learning; Neurodegeneration; Retina
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33172499 PMCID: PMC7654576 DOI: 10.1186/s13195-020-00715-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Impact factor: 6.982
Available diagnostic information for all AD cases
| AD subject | Age (years) | MMSE | Neuropsychol. assessment | Structural MRI | FDG PET | Amyloid-PET | CSF | Duration of follow-up (years) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 82 | 15 | + | +/− | − | − | − | 10.5 |
| 2 | 69 | 18 | + | − | + | − | − | 1 |
| 3 | 63 | 22 | + | + | − | − | − | 2 |
| 4 | 67 | 27 | + | + | − | − | − | 4.5 |
| 5 | 62 | ≤ 8* | + | +/− | − | + | + | 3.5 |
| 6 | 73 | 17 | + | + | − | − | − | 1.5 |
| 7 | 74 | 10 | – | + | + | − | − | 2 |
| 8 | 76 | 14 | – | + | − | − | − | 1 |
| 9 | 71 | 15 | + | + | + | − | + | 7 |
| 10 | 81 | 17 | + | + | − | − | − | 6 |
| 11 | 79 | 22 | + | + | + | − | + | 1 |
| 12 | 77 | 20 | + | +/− | +/− | − | + | 4 |
| 13 | 72 | 22 | + | + | + | − | − | 3.5 |
| 14 | 70 | 14 | – | + | + | − | + | 1.5 |
| 15 | 73 | 24 | + | + | − | − | − | 1.5 |
| 16 | 75 | 24 | + | + | + | − | + | 5 |
| 17 | 58 | 10 | – | + | + | − | + | 1.5 |
MMSE Mini-Mental State Examination score at the time of testing, Neuropsychol. assessment neuropsychological assessment as part of the diagnostic workup, + performed and in accordance with an AD diagnosis, − not done, +/− performed but not contributive. APOE genotypes are not provided for confidentiality reasons
*MMSE no longer possible at the time of ocular imaging; noted score is the latest available one
Fig. 1Illustration of the positioning of the 4 rectangular regions of interest. Regions are indicated by superior 1 (S1), superior 2 (S2), inferior 1 (I1), and inferior 2 (I2). The green zones refer to the parts in the image that were used in the analysis after removing the retinal blood vessels. OD refers to the optic disc
Demographical and clinical characteristics
| Parameter | Alzheimer’s disease (AD) patients ( | Controls ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Time since AD diagnosis (years) | 2.7 ± 2.6 | NA | – |
| Age (years) | 71.9 ± 6.6 | 68.6 ± 8.4 | 0.193* |
| Sex (male/female) | 7/10 | 12/9 | 0.267‡ |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 24.9 ± 2.9 | 26.0 ± 4.4 | 0.412* |
| Eye (right/left) | 10/7 | 10/12 | 0.408‡ |
| MMSE | 17.6 ± 5.5 | 29.3 ± 0.9 | |
| BCVA (logMAR) | 0.14 ± 0.11 | 0.06 ± 0.08 | |
| IOP (mmHg) | 14 ± 3 | 15 ± 4 | 0.359* |
| Phakic (yes/no) | 15/2 | 12/10 | |
| Vertical cup/disc ratio | 0.52 ± 0.15 | 0.51 ± 0.21 | 0.878* |
| RNFLAVG (μm) | 84.8 ± 7.5 | 92.1 ± 7.3 | |
| RNFLSUP (μm) | 104.2 ± 8.9 | 109.8 ± 12.4 | 0.019§ |
| RNFLINF (μm) | 104.3 ± 11.1 | 115.6 ± 11.4 | |
| RNFLTEM (μm) | 63.3 ± 8.1 | 70.4 ± 6.7 | 0.069§ |
| RNFLNAS (μm) | 66.3 ± 11.7 | 72.7 ± 8.6 | 0.012§ |
MMSE Mini-Mental State Examination, BCVA best corrected visual acuity, RNFL retinal nerve fiber layer. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation
*Independent samples t test
†Mann-Whitney U test
‡Chi-square test
§Multivariate linear regression corrected for age, gender, and image quality
Fig. 2a Mean spectra in the 4 ROIs after normalization. Shaded areas indicate the mean ± the standard error of the mean. S1 and S2 refer to the superior regions, and I1 and I2 refer to the inferior regions (cfr. Fig. 2). b Average receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curves over all inner loop cross-validation runs for all configurations. S1 and I2 refer to models taking only spectra as input, and S1+RNFL and I2+RNFL refer to models with both spectra and retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness as input
Fig. 3a Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve generated through nested leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV). Area under the curve (AUC) given with 95% confidence interval. b Distribution of AD probabilities. Probabilities predicted by the models in the outer LOOCV loop for AD patients (top) and cognitively intact elderly (CIE) subjects (bottom)