Premium
O4‐04‐01: WHAT CAN STRUCTURAL MRI TELL ABOUT A/T/N STAGING?
Author(s) -
Lang Alexander,
Weiner Michael W.,
Tosun Duygu
Publication year - 2019
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 - 10.1016/j.jalz.2019.06.4758
Subject(s) - medicine , biomarker , imaging biomarker , clinical trial , cohort , nuclear medicine , magnetic resonance imaging , clinical practice , radiology , oncology , physical therapy , biochemistry , chemistry
(h21⁄40.216) for memory tests (CANTAB PAL) in the preclinical group, while the prodromal group showed most significant declines in the IQ (h21⁄40.409), and everyday skill (h21⁄40.425) domains in addition to memory decline. Fig1 shows the predicted EBM stage at baseline versus follow-up. We observe a general increase of EBM stage with time: 76% of participants at baseline either increased in stage or were stable (40.5% of participants increased in stage; 35.1% stayed constant; 24.3% decreased (improved) in stage). Outliers are likely due to missing data. Fig1 title: Predicted EBM stage at baseline and follow-up. Marker radius scales with n of participants at each point; the largest circle corresponds to N1⁄413 at (0,0); smallest circles correspond to N1⁄41. Conclusions: These results indicate that AD progression in DS is similar to sporadic and familial AD. The proposed sequence of abnormality events derived at baseline is consistent, and hence a plausible description of DSAD progression. Furthermore, the model can identify participants who rapidly increase in stage, corresponding to observed cases of aggressive decline.