Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Left frontal connectivity attenuates the adverse effect of entorhinal tau pathology on memory
Neitzel J, Franzmeier N, Rubinski A, Ewers M, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI).. Neurology, 2019-06-24
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Objective To investigate whether higher global left frontal cortex (gLFC) connectivity, a putative neural substrate of cognitive reserve, attenuates the effect of entorhinal tau PET levels on episodic memory in older adults. Methods Cross-sectional 18 F-AV-1451 PET (to assess tau pathology), 18 F-AV-45 or 18 F-BAY94-9172 PET (to assess β-amyloid [Aβ]), and resting-state fMRI were obtained in 125 elderly participants from the Alzheimer's Neuroimaging Initiative, including 82 cognitively normal participants (amyloid PET-positive [Aβ+], n = 27) and 43 patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (Aβ+ = 15). Resting-state fMRI gLFC connectivity was computed for each participant as the average functional connectivity between the left frontal cortex (LFC) (seed) and each remaining voxel in the gray matter. As a measure of tau pathology, we assessed the mean tau PET uptake in the entorhinal cortex. In linear mixed-effects regression analysis, we tested the interaction term gLFC connectivity × entorhinal tau PET on delayed free recall performance. In addition, we assessed whether higher connectivity of the whole frontoparietal control network (FPCN), of which the LFC is a major hub, is associated with reserve. Results Higher entorhinal tau PET was strongly associated with poorer delayed free recall performance (β/SE = -0.49/0.07, p < 0.001). A significant gLFC connectivity × entorhinal tau PET interaction was found (β/SE = 0.19/0.06, p = 0.003), such that at higher levels of gLFC connectivity, the decrease in memory score per unit of entorhinal tau PET was attenuated. The FPCN connectivity × tau interaction was also significant (β/SE = 0.10/0.04, p = 0.012). Conclusion Both gLFC and FPCN connectivity are associated with higher resilience against the adverse effect of early-stage entorhinal tau pathology on memory performance.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Neitzel, J., Franzmeier, N., Rubinski, A., & Ewers, M. (2019). Left frontal connectivity attenuates the adverse effect of entorhinal tau pathology on memory. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000007822
Vancouver
Neitzel J, Franzmeier N, Rubinski A, Ewers M. Left frontal connectivity attenuates the adverse effect of entorhinal tau pathology on memory. Neurology. 2019. doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000007822. PMID: 31235661.
BibTeX
@article{neitzel2019-31235661,
author = {Neitzel, J. and Franzmeier, N. and Rubinski, A. and Ewers, M.},
title = {{Left frontal connectivity attenuates the adverse effect of entorhinal tau pathology on memory}},
journal = {Neurology},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1212/wnl.0000000000007822},
pmid = {31235661},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000007822}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- In addition, we assessed whether higher connectivity of the whole frontoparietal control network (FPCN), of which the LFC is a major hub, is associated with reserve.
- Results Higher entorhinal tau PET was strongly associated with poorer delayed free recall performance (β/SE = -0.49/0.07, p < 0.001).
- A significant gLFC connectivity × entorhinal tau PET interaction was found (β/SE = 0.19/0.06, p = 0.003), such that at higher levels of gLFC connectivity, the decrease in memory score per unit of entorhinal tau PET was attenuated.
- The FPCN connectivity × tau interaction was also significant (β/SE = 0.10/0.04, p = 0.012).
- Conclusion Both gLFC and FPCN connectivity are associated with higher resilience against the adverse effect of early-stage entorhinal tau pathology on memory performance.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Participants27
- Evidence strengthLow
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 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 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 (Neurology) |
| 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 | 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 | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 27 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 31235661) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| 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 “entorhinal”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “entorhinal”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.