| Literature DB >> 36034141 |
Junjie Wu1, Syed S Shahid2,3, Qixiang Lin2, Antoine Hone-Blanchet2,4, Jeremy L Smith1, Benjamin B Risk5, Aditya S Bisht2, David W Loring2, Felicia C Goldstein2, Allan I Levey2, James J Lah2, Deqiang Qiu1,6.
Abstract
While hippocampal atrophy and its regional susceptibility to Alzheimer's disease (AD) are well reported at late stages of AD, studies of the asymptomatic stage of AD are limited but could elucidate early stage pathophysiology as well as provide predictive biomarkers. In this study, we performed multi-modal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to estimate morphometry, functional connectivity, and tissue microstructure of hippocampal subfields in cognitively normal adults including those with asymptomatic AD. High-resolution resting-state functional, diffusion and structural MRI, cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), and neuropsychological evaluations were performed in healthy young adults (HY: n = 40) and healthy older adults with negative (HO-: n = 47) and positive (HO+ : n = 25) CSF biomarkers of AD. Morphometry, functional connectivity, and tissue microstructure were estimated from the structural, functional, and diffusion MRI images, respectively. Our results indicated that normal aging affected morphometry, connectivity, and microstructure in all hippocampal subfields, while the subiculum and CA1-3 demonstrated the greatest sensitivity to asymptomatic AD pathology. Tau, rather than amyloid-β, was closely associated with imaging-derived synaptic and microstructural measures. Microstructural metrics were significantly associated with neuropsychological assessments. These findings suggest that the subiculum and CA1-3 are the most vulnerable in asymptomatic AD and tau level is driving these early changes.Entities:
Keywords: AD pathology; functional connectivity; hippocampus subfields; morphometry; normal aging; tissue microstructure
Year: 2022 PMID: 36034141 PMCID: PMC9413400 DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.901140
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Aging Neurosci ISSN: 1663-4365 Impact factor: 5.702
Demographics, CSF, and volumetric assessments.
| Groups | HO− vs. HY | HO+ vs. HO− | |||||||
| HY | HO− | Ho+ | (Partial) η2 | (Partial) η2 | |||||
|
| 40 | 47 | 25 | ||||||
| Age (years) | 26.1 ± 3.7 | 65.9 ± 4.8 | 69.7 ± 5.6 | 42.609 | <0.001*** | 0.955 | 3.012 | 0.025* | 0.115 |
| Sex (female) | 27 | 34 | 24 | 1.000 | 0.079 | ||||
| Aβ (pg/dl) | NA | 571.3 ± 107.2 | 398.6 ± 118.9 | NA | −5.345 | <0.001*** | 0.296 | ||
| T-tau (pg/dl) | NA | 46.1 ± 19.0 | 99.7 ± 36.1 | NA | 7.039 | <0.001*** | 0.422 | ||
| P-tau (pg/dl) | NA | 27.7 ± 10.5 | 46.0 ± 21.5 | NA | 4.411 | <0.001*** | 0.223 | ||
| T-tau/Aβ ratio | NA | 0.081 ± 0.029 | 0.263 ± 0.105 | NA | 9.598 | <0.001*** | 0.575 | ||
| eTIV (mm3) | 1.54 × 106 ± 1.68 × 105 | 1.49 × 106 ± 1.50 × 105 | 1.53 × 106 ± 1.13 × 105 | −1.585 | 0.467 | 0.029 | 2.956 | 0.026* | 0.114 |
| Whole hippocampal volume (mm3) | 8.28 × 103 ± 7.62 × 102 | 7.79 × 103 ± 7.95 × 102 | 7.57 × 103 ± 8.57 × 102 | −2.470 | 0.078 | 0.068 | −1.248 | 0.216 | 0.023 |
| Parahippocampal volume (mm3) | 4.40 × 103 ± 5.10 × 102 | 3.99 × 103 ± 4.37 × 102 | 3.81 × 103 ± 4.16 × 102 | −3.552 | 0.004** | 0.132 | −1.911 | 0.175 | 0.052 |
| ERC volume (mm3) | 4.15 × 103 ± 1.02 × 103 | 4.00 × 103 ± 6.28 × 102 | 3.66 × 103 ± 5.61 × 102 | −0.359 | 1.000 | 0.002 | −2.068 | 0.170 | 0.060 |
| PRC volume (mm3) | 3.93 × 103 ± 6.80 × 102 | 3.75 × 103 ± 4.50 × 102 | 3.54 × 103 ± 4.07 × 102 | −0.896 | 1.000 | 0.010 | −1.927 | 0.175 | 0.052 |
HY, healthy young adults; HO−, healthy older adults with negative CSF biomarker status; Ho+, healthy older adults with positive CSF biomarker status; Aβ, Amyloid-β 1-42; T-tau, total tau; P-tau, tau phosphorylated at threonine 181; eTIV, estimated total intracranial volume; ERC, entorhinal cortex; PRC, perirhinal cortex; NA, not applicable.
aGroup differences between HO− and HY were evaluated using an independent t-test (for age), a chi-square test (for sex), general linear models (GLM) with sex as a covariate (for eTIV), or GLM with sex and eTIV as covariates (for regional volumes).
bGroup differences between Ho+ and HO− were evaluated using an independent t-test (for age), a chi-square test (for sex), GLM with age and sex as covariates (for CSF assessments and eTIV), or GLM with age, sex and eTIV as covariates (for regional volumes).
Significant at *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001, Holm-Bonferroni corrected.
FIGURE 1Analysis pipeline of the hippocampal subfield networks. (A) Segmentations of the subiculum (orange), CA1-3 (green) and CA4-DG (blue) superimposed on T1-weighted anatomical image. (B) After data preprocessing, the functional MRI time course was extracted for each voxel. The mean time course of each subfield was also computed as seed signal. Connectivity maps for the subiculum (C) CA1-3 (D) and CA4-DG (E) networks averaged across a group of healthy young adults.
Neuropsychological assessments.
| Groups | HO− vs. HY | Ho+ vs. HO− | |||||||
| HY | HO− | Ho+ | Partial η2 | Partial η2 | |||||
| MoCA | 28.1 ± 1.9 | 26.4 ± 2.5 | 25.5 ± 2.4 | –3.064 | 0.024* | 0.120 | –1.034 | 1.000 | 0.016 |
| FCSRT free recall | 39.7 ± 4.0 | 36.0 ± 4.1 | 35.4 ± 3.3 | –3.705 | 0.004** | 0.170 | –0.596 | 1.000 | 0.006 |
| RCFT immediate free recall | 24.8 ± 5.4 | 17.8 ± 6.5 | 16.1 ± 5.2 | –4.466 | < 0.001*** | 0.232 | –0.408 | 1.000 | 0.003 |
| RCFT delayed free recall | 24.3 ± 5.7 | 16.6 ± 6.9 | 14.6 ± 6.0 | –4.557 | < 0.001*** | 0.239 | –0.220 | 0.826 | 0.001 |
| RCFT copy accuracy score | 33.8 ± 2.5 | 32.3 ± 2.7 | 30.6 ± 4.1 | –2.071 | 0.252 | 0.061 | –0.561 | 1.000 | 0.005 |
| JoLO | 25.0 ± 2.8 | 25.1 ± 4.0 | 23.1 ± 4.0 | 0.288 | 0.774 | 0.001 | –0.274 | 1.000 | 0.001 |
| Letter fluency (FAS) | 46.4 ± 6.8 | 40.9 ± 10.8 | 43.3 ± 12.7 | –2.264 | 0.189 | 0.070 | 1.264 | 1.000 | 0.024 |
| Animal fluency | 24.2 ± 5.5 | 21.8 ± 4.7 | 21.7 ± 4.8 | –1.848 | 0.276 | 0.048 | –0.797 | 1.000 | 0.010 |
| TMTA | 28.3 ± 11.6 | 34.4 ± 12.4 | 35.4 ± 10.6 | 2.057 | 0.215 | 0.058 | 0.337 | 1.000 | 0.002 |
| TMTB | 62.7 ± 29.9 | 81.0 ± 45.3 | 86.5 ± 31.0 | 1.818 | 0.219 | 0.046 | 0.443 | 1.000 | 0.003 |
| TMTB-TMTA | 34.4 ± 24.0 | 46.6 ± 44.0 | 51.1 ± 24.6 | 1.273 | 0.414 | 0.023 | 0.582 | 1.000 | 0.005 |
HY, healthy young adults; HO−, healthy older adults with negative CSF biomarker status; Ho+, healthy older adults with positive CSF biomarker status; MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment; FCSRT, Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test; RCFT, Rey Complex Figure Test; JoLO, Judgment of Line Orientation; TMTA, Trail Making Test Part A; TMTB, Trail Making Test Part B.
aGroup differences between HO− and HY were evaluated using general linear models with sex as a covariate.
bGroup differences between Ho+ and HO− were evaluated using general linear models with age and sex as covariates.
Significant at *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001, Holm-Bonferroni corrected.
FIGURE 2Shape analysis in the hippocampus (light blue) using FSL FIRST shows group differences between healthy young adults (HY) and healthy older adults with negative CSF biomarker status (HO−) (A) and between HO− and healthy older adults with positive CSF biomarker status (Ho+) (B). HO− < HY and Ho+ < HO− (red) were found. P-values were determined using general linear models with age and sex as covariates. The results were corrected using threshold-free cluster enhancement where family-wise error rate was controlled at 0.05. (C) Segmentations of the subiculum (orange), CA1-3 (green) and CA4-DG (blue).
FIGURE 3Group differences of functional connectivity in the subiculum (A,D), CA1-3 (B,E) and CA4-DG (C,F) networks between healthy young adults (HY) and healthy older adults with negative CSF biomarker status (HO−). Box plots show the median, quartiles and whiskers that represent 1.5 × the interquartile range. P-values were determined using general linear models with sex, normalized whole hippocampal volume, and total intracranial volume as covariates, and adjusted for multiple comparisons using Holm-Bonferroni correction. In voxel-wise analysis (D–F), the results were corrected using threshold-free cluster enhancement where family-wise error rate was controlled at 0.05. Significant at **P < 0.01 and ***P < 0.001.
FIGURE 4Group differences of neurite density index (NDI) (A–C), orientation dispersion index (ODI) (D–F) and volume fraction of isotropic water diffusion (V) (G–I) in the subiculum (A,D,G), CA1-3 (B,E,H) and CA4-DG (C,F,I) between healthy young adults (HY) and healthy older adults with negative CSF biomarker status (HO−). Box plots show the median, quartiles and whiskers that represent 1.5 × the interquartile range. P-values were determined using general linear models with sex, normalized whole hippocampal volume, and total intracranial volume as covariates, and adjusted for multiple comparisons using Holm-Bonferroni correction. Significant at ***P < 0.001.
FIGURE 5Correlations of hippocampal subfield connectivity and diffusion metrics with neuropsychological performance: volume fraction of isotropic water diffusion (V) in the subiculum vs. the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score (A) V in the subiculum vs. Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT) free recall score (B) V in CA1-3 vs. FCSRT free recall score (C) and neurite density index (NDI) in the subiculum vs. Rey Complex Figure Test (RCFT) copy accuracy score (D). The associations were evaluated using partial correlation with age, sex, normalized whole hippocampal volume, and total intracranial volume as covariates. P-values were adjusted for multiple comparisons using Holm-Bonferroni correction. The fitting lines are also shown to indicate trends.
FIGURE 6Correlations of CSF biomarker measurements with hippocampal subfield connectivity and diffusion metrics: tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (P-tau) vs. functional connectivity in CA4-DG network (A,C) and total tau (T-tau)/amyloid-β 1-42 (Aβ) ratio vs. orientation dispersion index (ODI) in the subiculum (B). The associations were evaluated using partial correlation with age, sex, normalized whole hippocampal volume, and total intracranial volume as covariates. P-values were adjusted for multiple comparisons using Holm-Bonferroni correction. Blue and orange dots represent healthy older adults with negative CSF biomarker status (HO−) and positive CSF biomarker status (Ho+), respectively. The fitting lines are also shown to indicate trends for HO− (blue lines) and Ho+ (orange lines). In voxel-wise analysis in HO− (C), the results were corrected using threshold-free cluster enhancement where family-wise error rate was controlled at 0.05.