Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Functional brain architecture is associated with the rate of tau accumulation in Alzheimer's disease
Franzmeier N, Neitzel J, Rubinski A, Smith R, Strandberg O, Ossenkoppele R, Hansson O, Ewers M et al.. Nature communications, 2020-01-17
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
In Alzheimer's diseases (AD), tau pathology is strongly associated with cognitive decline. Preclinical evidence suggests that tau spreads across connected neurons in an activity-dependent manner. Supporting this, cross-sectional AD studies show that tau deposition patterns resemble functional brain networks. However, whether higher functional connectivity is associated with higher rates of tau accumulation is unclear. Here, we combine resting-state fMRI with longitudinal tau-PET in two independent samples including 53 (ADNI) and 41 (BioFINDER) amyloid-biomarker defined AD subjects and 28 (ADNI) vs. 16 (BioFINDER) amyloid-negative healthy controls. In both samples, AD subjects show faster tau accumulation than controls. Second, in AD, higher fMRI-assessed connectivity between 400 regions of interest (ROIs) is associated with correlated tau-PET accumulation in corresponding ROIs. Third, we show that a model including baseline connectivity and tau-PET is associated with future tau-PET accumulation. Together, connectivity is associated with tau spread in AD, supporting the view of transneuronal tau propagation.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Franzmeier, N., Neitzel, J., Rubinski, A., Smith, R., Strandberg, O., Ossenkoppele, R., et al. (2020). Functional brain architecture is associated with the rate of tau accumulation in Alzheimer's disease. Nature communications. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-14159-1
Vancouver
Franzmeier N, Neitzel J, Rubinski A, Smith R, Strandberg O, Ossenkoppele R, et al. Functional brain architecture is associated with the rate of tau accumulation in Alzheimer's disease. Nature communications. 2020. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-14159-1. PMID: 31953405.
BibTeX
@article{franzmeier2020-31953405,
author = {Franzmeier, N. and Neitzel, J. and Rubinski, A. and Smith, R. and Strandberg, O. and Ossenkoppele, R. and Hansson, O. and Ewers, M. and others},
title = {{Functional brain architecture is associated with the rate of tau accumulation in Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Nature communications},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1038/s41467-019-14159-1},
pmid = {31953405},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-14159-1}
}
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 Alzheimer's diseases (AD), tau pathology is strongly associated with cognitive decline.
- Preclinical evidence suggests that tau spreads across connected neurons in an activity-dependent manner.
- However, whether higher functional connectivity is associated with higher rates of tau accumulation is unclear.
- Second, in AD, higher fMRI-assessed connectivity between 400 regions of interest (ROIs) is associated with correlated tau-PET accumulation in corresponding ROIs.
- Third, we show that a model including baseline connectivity and tau-PET is associated with future tau-PET accumulation.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Nature communications) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 31953405) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 32 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100. |
| Total | 55 / 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.
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “networks”
187 studies in the library carry the topic tag “networks”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 187 tagged studies.