Home › Research › Hippocampus size on brain scans
Objective subtle cognitive difficulties predict future amyloid accumulation and neurodegeneration
Thomas KR, Bangen KJ, Weigand AJ, Edmonds EC, Wong CG, Cooper S, Delano-Wood L, Bondi MW et al.. Neurology, 2019-12-30
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Objective To determine the temporal sequence of objectively defined subtle cognitive difficulties (Obj-SCD) in relation to amyloidosis and neurodegeneration, the current study examined the trajectories of amyloid PET and medial temporal neurodegeneration in participants with Obj-SCD relative to cognitively normal (CN) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) groups. Method A total of 747 Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative participants (305 CN, 153 Obj-SCD, 289 MCI) underwent neuropsychological testing and serial amyloid PET and structural MRI examinations. Linear mixed effects models examined 4-year rate of change in cortical 18 F-florbetapir PET, entorhinal cortex thickness, and hippocampal volume in those classified as Obj-SCD and MCI relative to CN. Result Amyloid accumulation was faster in the Obj-SCD group than in the CN group; the MCI and CN groups did not significantly differ from each other. The Obj-SCD and MCI groups both demonstrated faster entorhinal cortical thinning relative to the CN group; only the MCI group exhibited faster hippocampal atrophy than CN participants. Conclusion Relative to CN participants, Obj-SCD was associated with faster amyloid accumulation and selective vulnerability of entorhinal cortical thinning, whereas MCI was associated with faster entorhinal and hippocampal atrophy. Findings suggest that Obj-SCD, operationally defined using sensitive neuropsychological measures, can be identified prior to or during the preclinical stage of amyloid deposition. Further, consistent with the Braak neurofibrillary staging scheme, Obj-SCD status may track with early entorhinal pathologic changes, whereas MCI may track with more widespread medial temporal change. Thus, Obj-SCD may be a sensitive and noninvasive predictor of encroaching amyloidosis and neurodegeneration, prior to frank cognitive impairment associated with MCI.
Key findings
- Result Amyloid accumulation was faster in the Obj-SCD group than in the CN group; the MCI and CN groups did not significantly differ from each other.
- The Obj-SCD and MCI groups both demonstrated faster entorhinal cortical thinning relative to the CN group; only the MCI group exhibited faster hippocampal atrophy than CN participants.
- Conclusion Relative to CN participants, Obj-SCD was associated with faster amyloid accumulation and selective vulnerability of entorhinal cortical thinning, whereas MCI was associated with faster entorhinal and hippocampal atrophy.
- Findings suggest that Obj-SCD, operationally defined using sensitive neuropsychological measures, can be identified prior to or during the preclinical stage of amyloid deposition.
- Thus, Obj-SCD may be a sensitive and noninvasive predictor of encroaching amyloidosis and neurodegeneration, prior to frank cognitive impairment associated with MCI.
Study details
- Participants747
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 50/100
Published in a leading specialty 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 29 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 50 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 | 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 | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 747 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 31888974) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 29 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 50 out of 100. |
| Total | 50 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Thomas, K. R., Bangen, K. J., Weigand, A. J., Edmonds, E. C., Wong, C. G., Cooper, S., et al. (2020). Objective subtle cognitive difficulties predict future amyloid accumulation and neurodegeneration. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000008838
Vancouver
Thomas KR, Bangen KJ, Weigand AJ, Edmonds EC, Wong CG, Cooper S, et al. Objective subtle cognitive difficulties predict future amyloid accumulation and neurodegeneration. Neurology. 2020. doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000008838. PMID: 31888974.
BibTeX
@article{thomas2020-31888974,
author = {Thomas, K. R. and Bangen, K. J. and Weigand, A. J. and Edmonds, E. C. and Wong, C. G. and Cooper, S. and Delano-Wood, L. and Bondi, M. W. and others},
title = {{Objective subtle cognitive difficulties predict future amyloid accumulation and neurodegeneration}},
journal = {Neurology},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1212/wnl.0000000000008838},
pmid = {31888974},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000008838}
}