Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Brain scans and imaging

Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by two hallmark molecular pathologies: amyloid aβ 1-42 and Tau neurofibrillary tangles. To date, studies of functional connectivity MRI (fcMRI) in individuals with preclinical AD have relied on associations with in vivo measures of amyloid pathology. With the recent advent of in vivo Tau-PET tracers it is now possible to extend investigations on fcMRI in a sample of cognitively normal elderly humans to regional measures of Tau. We modeled fcMRI measures across four major cortical association networks [default-mode network (DMN), salience network (SAL), dorsal attention network, and frontoparietal control network] as a function of global cortical amyloid [Pittsburgh Compound B (PiB)-PET] and regional Tau (AV1451-PET) in entorhinal, inferior temporal (IT), and inferior parietal cortex. Results showed that the interaction term between PiB and IT AV1451 was significantly associated with connectivity in the DMN and salience. The interaction revealed that amyloid-positive (aβ + ) individuals show increased connectivity in the DMN and salience when neocortical Tau levels are low, whereas aβ + individuals demonstrate decreased connectivity in these networks as a function of elevated Tau-PET signal. This pattern suggests a hyperconnectivity phase followed by a hypoconnectivity phase in the course of preclinical AD. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT This article offers a first look at the relationship between Tau-PET imaging with F 18 -AV1451 and functional connectivity MRI (fcMRI) in the context of amyloid-PET imaging. The results suggest a nonlinear relationship between fcMRI and both Tau-PET and amyloid-PET imaging. The pattern supports recent conjecture that the AD fcMRI trajectory is characterized by periods of both hyperconnectivity and hypoconnectivity. Furthermore, this nonlinear pattern can account for the sometimes conflicting reports of associations between amyloid and fcMRI in individuals with preclinical Alzheimer's disease.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Schultz, A. P., Chhatwal, J. P., Hedden, T., Mormino, E. C., Hanseeuw, B. J., Sepulcre, J., et al. (2017). Phases of Hyperconnectivity and Hypoconnectivity in the Default Mode and Salience Networks Track with Amyloid and Tau in Clinically Normal Individuals. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.3263-16.2017

Vancouver

Schultz AP, Chhatwal JP, Hedden T, Mormino EC, Hanseeuw BJ, Sepulcre J, et al. Phases of Hyperconnectivity and Hypoconnectivity in the Default Mode and Salience Networks Track with Amyloid and Tau in Clinically Normal Individuals. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 2017. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3263-16.2017. PMID: 28314821.

BibTeX

@article{schultz2017-28314821,
  author  = {Schultz, A. P. and Chhatwal, J. P. and Hedden, T. and Mormino, E. C. and Hanseeuw, B. J. and Sepulcre, J. and Huijbers, W. and LaPoint, M. and others},
  title   = {{Phases of Hyperconnectivity and Hypoconnectivity in the Default Mode and Salience Networks Track with Amyloid and Tau in Clinically Normal Individuals}},
  journal = {The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience},
  year    = {2017},
  doi     = {10.1523/jneurosci.3263-16.2017},
  pmid    = {28314821},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.3263-16.2017}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 38/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 22 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 38 of 100. Total 38 of 100.22 of the 58 points we could judge = 38 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience)
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 2017 — 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 28314821)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 22 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100.
Total 38 / 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 Brain scans and imaging

Also tagged “connectivity”

187 studies in the library carry the topic tag “connectivity”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 187 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Brain scans and imaging

See all studies in Brain scans and imaging →