| Literature DB >> 33364603 |
Jiangyi Xia1, Ali Mazaheri2,3, Katrien Segaert2,3, David P Salmon4, Danielle Harvey5, Kim Shapiro2,3, Marta Kutas4,6, John M Olichney1.
Abstract
Reliable biomarkers of memory decline are critical for the early detection of Alzheimer's disease. Previous work has found three EEG measures, namely the event-related brain potential P600, suppression of oscillatory activity in the alpha frequency range (∼10 Hz) and cross-frequency coupling between low theta/high delta and alpha/beta activity, each of which correlates strongly with verbal learning and memory abilities in healthy elderly and patients with mild cognitive impairment or prodromal Alzheimer's disease. In the present study, we address the question of whether event-related or oscillatory measures, or a combination thereof, best predict the decline of verbal memory in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease. Single-trial correlation analyses show that despite a similarity in their time courses and sensitivities to word repetition, the P600 and the alpha suppression components are minimally correlated with each other on a trial-by-trial basis (generally |r s| < 0.10). This suggests that they are unlikely to stem from the same neural mechanism. Furthermore, event-related brain potentials constructed from bandpass filtered (delta, theta, alpha, beta or gamma bands) single-trial data indicate that only delta band activity (1-4 Hz) is strongly correlated (r = 0.94, P < 0.001) with the canonical P600 repetition effect; event-related potentials in higher frequency bands are not. Importantly, stepwise multiple regression analyses reveal that the three event-related brain potential/oscillatory measures are complementary in predicting California Verbal Learning Test scores (overall R 2 ' s in 0.45-0.63 range). The present study highlights the importance of combining EEG event-related potential and oscillatory measures to better characterize the multiple mechanisms of memory failure in individuals with mild cognitive impairment or prodromal Alzheimer's disease.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; EEG; event-related potential; memory; mild cognitive impairment
Year: 2020 PMID: 33364603 PMCID: PMC7749791 DOI: 10.1093/braincomms/fcaa213
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Commun ISSN: 2632-1297
Figure 2Trial-by-trial correlations between the P600 and alpha suppression. Spearman correlations between the two measures at electrode Pz for each participant in the three groups. For 3 out of 36 participants, the two measures were significantly correlated across trials (uncorrected P values presented).
Mean (SD) values of demographics and CVLT scores in the three groups
| MCI stable | MCI converter | Control | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 10 | 15 | 11 |
| Age (years) | 71.1(7.5) | 74.6 (6.9) | 74.1 (6.8) |
| Sex | 4 F, 6 M | 5 F, 10 M | 7 F, 4 M |
| Education (years) | 14.3 (3.8) | 16.8 (2.8) | 15.8 (2.8) |
| CVLT list A, trials 1–5 | 38.9 (6.3) | 26.2 (8.0) | 60.3 (10.0) |
| CVLT short delay free recall | 5.3 (2.7) | 3.1 (2.7) | 13.2 (2.0) |
| CVLT short delay cued recall | 7.3 (2.2) | 4.9 (3.2) | 13.9 (1.6) |
| CVLT long delay free recall | 5.7 (2.0) | 3.5 (2.8) | 13.0 (2.0) |
| CVLT long delay cued recall | 7.3 (2.4) | 3.9 (2.8) | 13.3 (1.8) |
| CVLT discriminability (%) | 86. (5.0) | 72.9 (15.7) | 96.9 (4.1) |
P < 0.05, MCI stable vs. MCI converter;
P < 0.05, MCI stable vs. control;
CVLT = California Verbal Learning Test.
Figure 1The P600 and alpha word repetition effects. (A) Upper: grand averaged ERP waveforms (standard errors presented as shaded areas) elicited by new and repeated semantically congruous words at the midline-parietal electrode Pz are shown for the three groups. Lower: scalp distributions of the P600 word repetition effect measured as the difference in amplitude between congruous new and congruous old words (new–old) from 0.5 to 0.8 s after word onset. (B) Upper: TFRs of the differences in power change between new words and the third presentations of these words (new–3rd presentation) at electrode Pz for the three groups. The alpha (9–11 Hz) suppression effects are measured between 0.5 and 1 s as highlighted by the black boxes. Lower: scalp distributions of the alpha suppression effects.
Figure 3Frequency band-specific ERPs. Delta (upper) and alpha (lower) bandpass filtered ERP waveforms elicited by new and repeated semantically congruous words at electrode Pz for the three groups.
Pearson correlations between each of the three EEG/ERP measures and CVLT scores across all subjects
| CVLT | P600 repetition effect (congruous) | Alpha repetition effect (congruous + incongruous) | Theta/delta (Pz) − alpha/beta (Fz) coupling (congruous) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| List A, trials 1–5 | 0.55 | <0.001 | −0.40 | 0.016 | −0.53 | 0.001 |
| Short delay free recall | 0.43 | 0.009 | −0.45 | 0.006 | −0.50 | 0.002 |
| Short delay cued recall | 0.53 | 0.001 | −0.40 | 0.017 | −0.46 | 0.005 |
| Long delay free recall | 0.55 | 0.001 | −0.44 | 0.008 | −0.51 | 0.002 |
| Long delay cued recall | 0.59 | <0.001 | −0.47 | 0.004 | −0.49 | 0.002 |
| Discriminability | 0.53 | 0.001 | −0.33 | 0.047 | −0.54 | 0.001 |
CVLT = California Verbal Learning Test.
P < 0.05;
P < 0.01;
P < 0.001.
Hierarchical stepwise multiple regression models for California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT; Delis ) scores
| Predictor variables |
| Adjusted | Standardized |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Block 1 | 0.051 | −0.038 | ||
| Age | 0.157 | 0.258 | ||
| Education | 0.242 | 0.097 | ||
| Gender (male) | −0.061 | 0.667 | ||
| P600 repetition—congruous | 0.361 | 0.278 | 0.386 | 0.012 |
| θ/δ-α/β coupling—congruous | 0.509 | 0.428 | −0.471 | 0.002 |
| Alpha repetition effect | 0.574 | 0.486 | −0.272 | 0.045 |
| CVLT short delay free recall | ||||
| Block 1 | 0.036 | −0.054 | ||
| Age | 0.189 | 0.194 | ||
| Education | 0.182 | 0.217 | ||
| Gender (male) | −0.039 | 0.797 | ||
| θ/δ-α/β coupling—congruous | 0.307 | 0.217 | −0.580 | <0.001 |
| Alpha repetition effect | 0.504 | 0.421 | −0.444 | 0.002 |
| CVLT short delay cued recall | ||||
| Block 1 | 0.031 | −0.060 | ||
| Age | 0.296 | 0.059 | ||
| Education | 0.168 | 0.292 | ||
| Gender (male) | −0.003 | 0.983 | ||
| P600 repetition—congruous | 0.318 | 0.230 | 0.477 | 0.003 |
| θ/δ-α/β coupling—congruous | 0.451 | 0.359 | −0.421 | 0.012 |
| CVLT long delay free recall | ||||
| Block 1 | 0.075 | −0.012 | ||
| Age | 0.216 | 0.106 | ||
| Education | 0.300 | 0.034 | ||
| Gender (male) | −0.134 | 0.323 | ||
| P600 repetition—congruous | 0.400 | 0.323 | 0.393 | 0.007 |
| θ/δ-α/β coupling—congruous | 0.534 | 0.456 | −0.452 | 0.002 |
| Alpha repetition effect | 0.614 | 0.534 | −0.303 | 0.021 |
| CVLT long delay cued recall | ||||
| Block 1 | 0.030 | −0.061 | ||
| Age | 0.265 | 0.044 | ||
| Education | 0.206 | 0.126 | ||
| Gender (male) | −0.016 | 0.900 | ||
| P600 repetition—congruous | 0.404 | 0.327 | 0.427 | 0.003 |
| θ/δ-α/β coupling—congruous | 0.540 | 0.464 | −0.457 | 0.002 |
| Alpha repetition effect | 0.633 | 0.558 | −0.327 | 0.011 |
| CVLT discriminability | ||||
| Block 1 | 0.095 | 0.010 | ||
| Age | 0.101 | 0.502 | ||
| Education | 0.157 | 0.318 | ||
| Gender (male) | −0.131 | 0.403 | ||
| P600 repetition—congruous | 0.334 | 0.248 | 0.428 | 0.007 |
| θ/δ-α/β coupling—congruous | 0.464 | 0.375 | −0.418 | 0.011 |