Cited by 176Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

MRI and histological analysis of beta-amyloid plaques in both human Alzheimer’s disease and APP/PS1 transgenic mice.

Open access
Meadowcroft, Mark D., Connor, James R., Smith, Michael B., Yang, Qing X.·2009·Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between MR image contrast associated with beta-amyloid (Abeta) plaques and their histology and compare the histopathological basis of image contrast and the relaxation mechanism associated with Abeta plaques in human Alzheimer's disease (AD) and transgenic APP/PS1 mouse tissues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With the aid of the previously developed histological coil, T(2) (*)-weighted images and R(2) (*) parametric maps were directly compared with histology stains acquired from the same set of Alzheimer's and APP/PS1 tissue slices. RESULTS: The electron microscopy and histology images revealed significant differences in plaque morphology and associated iron concentration between AD and transgenic APP/PS1 mice tissue samples. For AD tissues, T(2) (*) contrast of Abeta-plaques was directly associated with the gradation of iron concentration. Plaques with significantly less iron load in the APP/PS1 animal tissues are equally conspicuous as the human plaques in the MR images. CONCLUSION: These data suggest a duality in the relaxation mechanism where both high focal iron concentration and highly compact fibrillar beta-amyloid masses cause rapid proton transverse magnetization decay. For human tissues, the former mechanism is likely the dominant source of R(2) (*) relaxation; for APP/PS1 animals, the latter is likely the major cause of increased transverse proton relaxation rate in Abeta plaques. The data presented are essential for understanding the histopathological underpinning of MRI measurement associated with Abeta plaques in humans and animals.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jmri.21731

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The plaques showed hypointensity in MRI images and increased with age in both cortex and hippocampus regions, consistent with previous findings.

    “The plaques showed hypointensity in MRI images and increased with age in both cortex and hippocampus regions, which is consistent with several previous findings (Higuchi et al., 2005; Meadowcroft et al., 2009).”

    From Age-dependent microstructure alterations in 5xFAD mice by high-resolution diffusion tensor imaging (2022) · cites this paper as Meadowcroft et al., 2009

    The Results (page unavailable) identify hypointense MRI spots as Aβ plaques in APP/PS1 mouse cortex and report plaques in the neocortex and hippocampus on histological staining. The Discussion (page unavailable) says mouse plaques are believed to grow throughout life, but the paper does not establish an age-related increase in both regions; it also says the smaller hippocampal plaques described in the Results were not visible on MRI. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meadowcroft, M. D., Connor, J. R., Smith, M. B., & Yang, Q. X.
Affiliations
Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
Yang, Qing X.
Venue
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-04-22
Volume
29
Issue
5
Pages
997-1007
ISSN
  • 1053-1807 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-2586
OpenAlex
W2085440855
Cited by
176
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 9
FWCI
7.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Pennsylvania Department of Health
  • University of Minnesota
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG027771, R01 AG)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB000459, 5R01EB000459-4)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
amyloid plaques, Alzheimer's disease, APP/PS1 mice, MRI contrast, T2-weighted imaging, R2* relaxation, iron content, plaque morphology, histopathology
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Animals, Brain, Disease Models, Animal, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Mice, Transgenic, Receptors, Cell Surface, Sensitivity and Specificity, Species Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Amyloid beta-Protein Precursor, Mice, Plaque, Amyloid, Protease Nexins

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review