Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Diagnostic power of default mode network resting state fMRI in the detection of Alzheimer's disease
Koch W, Teipel S, Mueller S, Benninghoff J, Wagner M, Bokde AL, Hampel H, Coates U et al.. Neurobiology of aging, 2010-06-11
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of default mode network (DMN) brain activity during resting is recently gaining attention as a potential noninvasive biomarker to diagnose incipient Alzheimer's disease. The aim of this study was to determine which method of data processing provides highest diagnostic power and to define metrics to further optimize the diagnostic value. fMRI was acquired in 21 healthy subjects, 17 subjects with mild cognitive impairment and 15 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and data evaluated both with volumes of interest (VOI)-based signal time course evaluations and independent component analyses (ICA). The first approach determines the amount of DMN region interconnectivity (as expressed with correlation coefficients); the second method determines the magnitude of DMN coactivation. Apolipoprotein E (ApoE) genotyping was available in 41 of the subjects examined. Diagnostic power (expressed as accuracy) of data of a single DMN region in independent component analyses was 64%, that of a single correlation of time courses between 2 DMN regions was 71%, respectively. With multivariate analyses combining both methods of analysis and data from various regions, accuracy could be increased to 97% (sensitivity 100%, specificity 95%). In nondemented subjects, no significant differences in activity within DMN could be detected comparing ApoE ε4 allele carriers and ApoE ε4 allele noncarriers. However, there were some indications that fMRI might yield useful information given a larger sample. Time course correlation analyses seem to outperform independent component analyses in the identification of patients with Alzheimer's disease. However, multivariate analyses combining both methods of analysis by considering the activity of various parts of the DMN as well as the interconnectivity between these regions are required to achieve optimal and clinically acceptable diagnostic power.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Koch, W., Teipel, S., Mueller, S., Benninghoff, J., Wagner, M., Bokde, A. L., et al. (2012). Diagnostic power of default mode network resting state fMRI in the detection of Alzheimer's disease. Neurobiology of aging. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.04.013
Vancouver
Koch W, Teipel S, Mueller S, Benninghoff J, Wagner M, Bokde AL, et al. Diagnostic power of default mode network resting state fMRI in the detection of Alzheimer's disease. Neurobiology of aging. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.04.013. PMID: 20541837.
BibTeX
@article{koch2012-20541837,
author = {Koch, W. and Teipel, S. and Mueller, S. and Benninghoff, J. and Wagner, M. and Bokde, A. L. and Hampel, H. and Coates, U. and others},
title = {{Diagnostic power of default mode network resting state fMRI in the detection of Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Neurobiology of aging},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.04.013},
pmid = {20541837},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.04.013}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- In nondemented subjects, no significant differences in activity within DMN could be detected comparing ApoE ε4 allele carriers and ApoE ε4 allele noncarriers.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Participants17
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neurobiology of aging) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2012 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 17 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 20541837) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 25 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.