CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 101Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchMemory and Neural Mechanisms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive impact of neuronal pathology in the entorhinal cortex and CA1 field in Alzheimer's disease

GUNTEN, A, KOVARI, E, BUSSIERE, T, RIVARA, C, GOLD, G, BOURAS, C, HOF, P, GIANNAKOPOULOS, P·2006·Neurobiology of Aging
DOI 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.02.008
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The relative contribution of Alzheimer's disease (AD) hippocampal neuronal pathology in cognitive decline is still a matter of debate. To address this issue, we performed a stereological analysis of layer II of the entorhinal cortex and the CA1 field of the hippocampus in 34 autopsy cases covering the whole spectrum of old age and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scores. In both areas, the proportion of neurofibrillary tangle (NFT)-containing neurons increased steadily as a function of the CDR score. Questionable dementia was associated with a 1.9% neuronal loss in the entorhinal cortex and 26% in the CA1 field. NFT numbers predicted only 38% of the neuron number variability in the entorhinal cortex and 55% in the CA1 field. Neuron counts in the entorhinal cortex and both neuron and NFT counts in the CA1 field were significantly associated with cognitive status explaining 25% and 44% of the CDR variability, respectively. Our data reveal a dissociation between the patterns of progression of NFT and neuronal loss in the entorhinal cortex and CA1 field. Moreover, they show that less than 50% of the cognitive variability may be attributable to AD neuronal pathology in these areas.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.02.008

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 101

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
GUNTEN, A., KOVARI, E., BUSSIERE, T., RIVARA, C., GOLD, G., BOURAS, C., HOF, P., & GIANNAKOPOULOS, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Lausanne (CH)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • University of Geneva (CH)
Corresponding author
  • HOF, P
  • GIANNAKOPOULOS, P
ORCID
Venue
Neurobiology of Aging
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-02
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
270-277
ISSN
0197-4580 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.02.008
OpenAlex
W2085182512
Cited by
101
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Neurobiology of Aging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (AG-02219, AG 05138, P50AG005138, P01AG002219)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, entorhinal cortex, CA1 field, hippocampus, neurofibrillary tangles, neuronal loss, cognitive decline, Clinical Dementia Rating, stereology, neuronal pathology, dementia progression
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Brain Mapping, Cell Count, Cognition Disorders, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Male, Middle Aged, Neurons, Neurofibrillary Tangles, Entorhinal Cortex

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