Premium
Hippocampal volumetric variability is associated with memory in subjective cognitive decline
Author(s) -
Ziegler Gabriel,
Heinzinger Nils,
Metzger Coraline D.,
Yakupov Renat,
Bittner Daniel,
Glanz Wenzel,
Spottke Annika,
Brosseron Frederic,
Bürger Katharina,
Fließbach Klaus,
Heneka Michael T.,
Laske Christoph,
Nestor Peter J.,
Peters Oliver,
Priller Josef,
Ramirez Alfredo,
Schneider Anja,
Speck Oliver,
Teipel Stefan J.,
Wiltfang Jens,
Wagner Michael,
Düzel Emrah,
Jessen Frank
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1002/alz.043527
Subject(s) - neuropsychology , cognitive decline , atrophy , cohort , medicine , cognition , audiology , voxel , episodic memory , psychology , disease , dementia , psychiatry , radiology
Background Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) has been proposed as an early symptomatic representation of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Per definition SCD implies patient’s memory being subjectively impaired while broad neuropsychological indicators are still in normal range (Fig.1A). SCD might show early signs of atrophy in networks typically affected during AD disease progression. Among individuals with SCD, the prevalence of older adults who are on a declining AD trajectory are more frequent than in cognitively normal (CN) elderly. The key distinction between SCD and MCI would be a higher offset in memory ability in SCD and a larger proportion of individuals who have progressed further along the AD spectrum. This predicts that brain volume variability would be higher in SCD than in CN and non‐complaining older adults. Methods We used sMRI at 3T to quantify anatomical differences using VBM in the DELCODE cohort in a subsample of 755 nondemented elderly (including 221 CN, 376 SCD & 158 MCI). We characterise memory ability using a composite score based on factor modelling (Wolfsgruber et al., under review) of neuropsychological tests. We explore group differences and the association of memory to local brain morphometry using GLM and SPM. We further analyze variability of local volumes across groups using voxel‐based Brown‐Forsythe‐Tests. Results While there were significant volumetric differences of MCI but not in SCD as compared to healthy controls (Fig1 C left & right panel), volumetric variability (across subjects) was higher within the SCD (and MCI) as compared to CN in hippocampus (Fig. 2A). Individual differences in memory‐ability were positively associated with posterior hippocampal volume in SCD, but showed no association with brain volume in CN (Fig. 2B‐C). In MCI, variability in memory‐ability was also related to posterior hippocampal volume and in addition also to the volume of the anterior hippocampus and entorhinal cortex. Conclusions In terms of morphometric variability and the association between morphometric measures and memory ability, the SCD group shows partial overlap with MCI and is distinct to cognitively normal, non‐complaining older adults. The posterior hippocampal region could be an area that explains interindividual memory variability in early stages of the Alzheimer’s disease spectrum.