| Literature DB >> 35370614 |
Guixian Xiao1,2,3, Yue Wu1,2,3, Yibing Yan1,2,3, Liying Gao1,2,3, Zhi Geng4,5,6, Bensheng Qiu7, Shanshan Zhou1,2,3, Gongjun Ji1,2,3, Xingqi Wu1,2,3, Panpan Hu1,2,3, Kai Wang1,2,3,4,5.
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a severe neurodegenerative disease, which mainly manifests as memory and progressive cognitive impairment. At present, there is no method to prevent the progression of AD or cure it, and effective intervention methods are urgently needed. Network-targeted intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) may be effective in alleviating the cognitive symptoms of patients with mild AD. The abnormal function of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) within executive control network (ECN) may be the pathogenesis of AD. Here, we verify the abnormality of the ECN in the native AD data set, and build the relevant brain network. In addition, we also recruited AD patients to verify the clinical effects of DLPFC-targeted intervention, and explor the neuro-mechanism. Sixty clinically diagnosed AD patients and 62 normal controls were recruited to explore the ECN abnormalities. In addition, the researchers recruited 20 AD patients to explore the efficacy of 14-session iTBS treatments for targeted DLPFC interventions. Functional magnetic resonance imaging and neuropsychological assessment of resting state were performed before and after the intervention. Calculate the changes in the functional connectivity of related brain regions in the ECN, as well as the correlation between the baseline functional connectivity and the clinical scoring scale, to clarify the mechanism of the response of iTBS treatment to treatment. Our results showed that compared with normal control samples, the brain function connection between the left DLPFC and the left IPL within the ECN of AD patients was significantly enhanced (t = 2.687, p = 0.008, FDR-corrected p = 0.045). And we found that iTBS stimulation significantly reduced the functional magnetic resonance imaging signal between the left DLPFC and the left IPL in the ECN (t = 4.271, p < 0.001, FDR-corrected p = 0.006), and it was related to the improvement of the patient's clinical symptoms (r = -0.470, p = 0.042). This work provides new insights for targeted brain area interventions. By targeted adjusting the functional connection of ECN to improve the clinical symptoms and cognitive function of AD patients.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; cognitive function; dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; executive control network; intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS)
Year: 2022 PMID: 35370614 PMCID: PMC8965584 DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.847223
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Aging Neurosci ISSN: 1663-4365 Impact factor: 5.750
FIGURE 1Location of the bilateral ECN seeds.
The demographic and clinical characteristics and neuropsychological test results of the Alzheimer’s Patients and normal controls in the cross-sectional study.
| Variable | Alzheimer’s patients [ | Healthy controls [textitn = 62, means (SD)] | χ 2/t | |
|
| ||||
| Gender (M/F) | 26/34 | 26/36 | 0.024 | 0.876 |
| Age (years) | 64.508(9.005) | 63.984(7.623) | 0.350 | 0.727 |
| Education (years) | 8.783(4.694) | 9.540(4.099) | –0.959 | 0.342 |
|
| ||||
| HIS | 1.117(0.691) | 0.968(0.567) | 1.305 | 0.194 |
| NPI-frequency | 11.086(12.9110) | 0.063(0.504) |
|
|
| NPI-distress | 4.069(5.057) | 0.016(0.126) |
|
|
| ADL | 31.103(11.243) | 20.175(0.555) |
|
|
| CDR | 1.026(0.581) | 0.071(0.176) |
|
|
| GDS | 3.828(0.704) | 1.317(0.715) |
|
|
|
| ||||
| AD8 | 5.071(2.100) | 0.952(1.223) |
|
|
| MMSE | 18.000(6.250) | 28.873(1.601) |
|
|
| MoCA | 11.852(5.822) | 25.444(3.605) |
|
|
| HAMA | 4.733(4.153) | 2.937(3.636) |
|
|
| HAMD | 3.696(3.421) | 2.952(3.381) | 1.155 | 0.250 |
| CDT | 1.650(1.219) | 3.902(0.436) |
|
|
|
| ||||
| CAVLT - immediately | 2.521(1.644) | 8.851(1.775) |
|
|
| CAVLT - delay | 0.590(1.203) | 9.778(2.661) |
|
|
| CAVLT - recognition | 10.295(4.112) | 14.317(1.045) |
|
|
|
| ||||
| digit span test(forward) | 5.818(1.634) | 6.968(1.576) |
|
|
| digit span test(backward) | 3.127(1.187) | 4.333(1.426) |
|
|
|
| ||||
| Stroop Color test | 42.825(35.050) | 21.537(6.402) |
|
|
| Stroop Word test | 69.120(59.354) | 30.304(10.147) |
|
|
| Stroop Interference test | 99.169(83.708) | 20.425(16.741) |
|
|
| Trail Making A | 199.429(137.609) | 70.482(23.389) |
|
|
| Trail Making B | 372.821(245.119) | 128.731(47.240) |
|
|
|
| ||||
| VFT - animal | 9.839(3.296) | 17.206(3.802) |
|
|
| BNT | 16.426(4.817) | 26.377(4.499) |
|
|
M, male; F, female; HIS, Hachinski Ischemic Scale; NPI, Neuropsychiatric Inventory; NA, not applicable; ADL, Lawton-Brody Activities of Daily Living; CDR, Clinical Dementia Rating; GDS, Global Deterioration Scale, MMSE, Mini-mental State Examination; MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test; HAMA, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale; HAMD, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; CDT, Clock Drawing Test; CAVLT, Chinese version of the Auditory Verbal Learning Test; VFT, Verbal Fluency Test; BNT, Boston Naming Test;
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001.
FIGURE 2The differences in resting-state functional connectivity (mean Z-value) within the bilateral ECN seeds between the AD patients and normal controls.
Pearson correlation analysis of RSFC within the ECN after iTBS stimulation in AD patients and normal controls.
| Alzheimer’s patients ( | Normal controls ( | ||||||
| Seed | Neuropsycholo-gical test |
| Seed | Neuropsycholo-gical test |
| ||
| Seed1-Seed5 | AD8 | 0.463 | 0.003 | Seed1-Seed3 | CAVLT- immediately | –0.303 | 0.017 |
| GDS | 0.323 | 0.015 | CAVLT-delay | –0.310 | 0.014 | ||
| VFT | –0.272 | 0.046 | CTT-B | –0.271 | 0.045 | ||
| CTT-B | 0.350 | 0.039 | Seed1-Seed5 | Stroop Color test | 0.307 | 0.016 | |
| Seed1-Seed6 | HAMD | 0.296 | 0.030 | Seed1-Seed6 | CDT | –0.281 | 0.030 |
| Seed1-Seed8 | CTT-B | 0.524 | 0.001 | Seed1-Seed7 | GDS | 0.280 | 0.028 |
| Seed2-Seed6 | CDT | –0.360 | 0.006 | CTT-B | 0.294 | 0.029 | |
| HAMA | 0.296 | 0.024 | Seed1-Seed8 | CDT | –0.274 | 0.034 | |
| HAMD | 0.389 | 0.004 | Seed2-Seed3 | CTT-B | –0.280 | 0.038 | |
| NPI-frequency*severity | 0.336 | 0.012 | Seed2-Seed5 | VFT | 0.258 | 0.199 | |
| VFT | –0.411 | 0.003 | Seed2-Seed6 | NPI-frequency*severity | –0.315 | 0.013 | |
| Seed3-Seed4 | HAMA | 0.294 | 0.025 | NPI-distress | –0.315 | 0.013 | |
| HAMD | 0.301 | 0.027 | Seed3-Seed4 | Stroop Word test | 0.312 | 0.014 | |
| ADL | 0.272 | 0.045 | Seed3-Seed5 | Stroop Color test | 0.256 | 0.047 | |
| DS(backward) | –0.274 | 0.047 | Seed3-Seed7 | MMSE | 0.300 | 0.018 | |
| BNT | –0.460 | 0.001 | Seed4-Seed7 | AD8 | 0.279 | 0.028 | |
| Seed3-Seed6 | HAMA | 0.276 | 0.036 | Stroop Word test | 0.282 | 0.028 | |
| HAMD | 0.378 | 0.005 | Seed4-Seed8 | Stroop Word test | 0.253 | 0.049 | |
| Seed4-Seed5 | DS(backward) | –0.292 | 0.034 | Seed6-Seed7 | NPI-frequency*severity | –0.325 | 0.01 |
| Seed4-Seed6 | HAMD | 0.326 | 0.016 | NPI-distress | –0.325 | 0.01 | |
| NPI-frequency*severity | 0.278 | 0.040 | Stroop Color test | 0.307 | 0.016 | ||
| Seed5-Seed8 | AD8 | 0.367 | 0.020 | Stroop Word test | 0.344 | 0.007 | |
| VFT | –0.303 | 0.026 | Seed6-Seed8 | Stroop Color test | 0.298 | 0.02 | |
| Seed7-Seed8 | MMSE | 0.336 | 0.010 | Stroop Word test | 0.270 | 0.035 | |
| MoCA | 0.270 | 0.040 | Seed7-Seed8 | HAMD | –0.263 | 0.039 | |
| CAVLT-delay | 0.285 | 0.030 | |||||
NPI, Neuropsychiatric Inventory; NA, not applicable; ADL, Lawton-Brody Activities of Daily Living; GDS, Global Deterioration Scale, MMSE, Mini-mental State Examination; MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test; HAMA, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale; HAMD, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; CDT, Clock Drawing Test; CAVLT, Chinese version of the Auditory Verbal Learning Test; CTT, Color Trail Test; VFT, Verbal Fluency Test; DS, Digit Span test; BNT, Boston Naming Test.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Improvement clinical characteristics and cognitive function after iTBS treatment in AD patients.
| Variable | pre [ | post [ |
| |
|
| ||||
| NPI-frequency*severity | 8.05(10.54) | 3.16(5.81) | 3.427 | 0.003 |
| NPI-distress | 2.47(2.91) | 1.31(1.91) | 3.209 | 0.005 |
| ADL | 29.10(8.59) | 27.47(8.20) | 3.759 | 0.001 |
| CDR | 0.87(0.46) | 0.81(0.48) | 1.455 | 0.163 |
| GDS | 3.89(0.74) | 3.63(0.76) | 2.041 | 0.056 |
|
| ||||
| MMSE | 19.26(4.73) | 21.58(5.75) | –5.349 | < 0.0001 |
| MoCA | 12.94(5.53) | 15.68(6.53) | –5.229 | < 0.0001 |
| HAMA | 4.53(3.18) | 2.84(2.31) | 2.191 | 0.042 |
| HAMD | 3.89(3.62) | 1.53(2.17) | 3.316 | 0.004 |
| CDT-4 | 1.42(0.84) | 2.37(1.06) | –4.869 | < 0.0001 |
|
| ||||
| CAVLT-immediately | 2.69(2.18) | 4.13(2.65) | –4.129 | 0.001 |
| CAVLT-delay | 1.79(2.80) | 3.53(3.93) | –3.124 | 0.006 |
| CAVLT-recognition | 11.68(2.43) | 13.05(2.15) | –3.256 | 0.004 |
|
| ||||
| digit span test(forward) | 5.58(1.89) | 6.21(1.68) | –2.721 | 0.014 |
| digit span test(backward) | 3.26(1.59) | 3.79(1.31) | –3.293 | 0.004 |
|
| ||||
| Stroop Color test | 44.38(28.51) | 37.42(23.94) | 2.304 | 0.034 |
| Stroop Word test | 63.30(36.46) | 54.57(31.32) | 2.947 | 0.009 |
| Stroop Interference test | 91.27(53.58) | 81.28(50.48) | 1.442 | 0.168 |
| Trail Making A | 245.95(180.38) | 229.89(152.80) | 1.430 | 0.170 |
| Trail Making B | 414.49(279.86) | 399.52(268.05) | 1.121 | 0.279 |
|
| ||||
| VFT-animal | 9.47(4.13) | 10.79(4.53) | –1.492 | 0.153 |
| BNT | 16.95(6.25) | 19.58(5.98) | –3.685 | 0.002 |
M, male; F, female; HIS, Hachinski Ischemic Scale; NPI, Neuropsychiatric Inventory; NA, not applicable; ADL, Lawton-Brody Activities of Daily Living; CDR, Clinical Dementia Rating; GDS, Global Deterioration Scale, MMSE, Mini-mental State Examination; MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test; HAMA, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale; HAMD, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; CDT, Clock Drawing Test; CAVLT, Chinese version of the Auditory Verbal Learning Test; VFT, Verbal Fluency Test; BNT, Boston Naming Test.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001.
FIGURE 3Differences before and after iTBS treatment in the Alzheimer’s Patients in the ECN.