Neurophysiological consequences of synapse loss in progressive supranuclear palsy
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Synaptic loss occurs early in many neurodegenerative diseases and contributes to cognitive impairment even in the absence of gross atrophy. Currently, for human disease there are few formal models to explain how cortical networks underlying cognition are affected by synaptic loss. We advocate that biophysical models of neurophysiology offer both a bridge from preclinical to clinical models of pathology and quantitative assays for experimental medicine. Such biophysical models can also disclose hidden neuronal dynamics generating neurophysiological observations such as EEG and magnetoencephalography. Here, we augment a biophysically informed mesoscale model of human cortical function by inclusion of synaptic density estimates as captured by 11C-UCB-J PET, and provide insights into how regional synapse loss affects neurophysiology. We use the primary tauopathy of progressive supranuclear palsy (Richardson’s syndrome) as an exemplar condition, with high clinicopathological correlations. Progressive supranuclear palsy causes a marked change in cortical neurophysiology in the presence of mild cortical atrophy and is associated with a decline in cognitive functions associated with the frontal lobe. Using parametric empirical Bayesian inversion of a conductance-based canonical microcircuit model of magnetoencephalography data, we show that the inclusion of regional synaptic density—as a subject-specific prior on laminar-specific neuronal populations—markedly increases model evidence. Specifically, model comparison suggests that a reduction in synaptic density in inferior frontal cortex affects superficial and granular layer glutamatergic excitation. This predicted individual differences in behaviour, demonstrating the link between synaptic loss, neurophysiology and cognitive deficits. The method we demonstrate is not restricted to progressive supranuclear palsy or the effects of synaptic loss: such pathology-enriched dynamic causal models can be used to assess the mechanisms of other neurological disorders, with diverse non-invasive measures of pathology, and is suitable to test the effects of experimental pharmacology.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
This approach has been used to study pathophysiology of non-AD dementias and confirmatory studies of drug interventions.
“This approach has been used to study the pathophysiology of non‐AD dementias, 18 , 19 and confirmatory studies of drug interventions. 5 , 18”
From Alzheimer's disease and its progression reduce pyramidal cell gain and connectivity (2025) · cites this paper as [19]
The Introduction and Discussion describe using the approach to investigate synapse loss and neurophysiology in progressive supranuclear palsy, supporting its use to study a non-AD disorder. The Discussion presents assessment of pharmacological interventions as a potential future application, not as a confirmatory drug-intervention study already conducted. The indexed passages do not provide page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.87)
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.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 67 · Cited by 21
- Authors
- Adams, N. E., Jafarian, A., Perry, A., Rouse, M. A., Shaw, A. D., Murley, A. G., Cope, T. E., Bevan-Jones, W. R., Passamonti, L., Street, D., Holland, N., Nesbitt, D., Hughes, L. E., Friston, K. J., & Rowe, J. B.
- Affiliations
- MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- University of Exeter (GB)
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Rowe, James B
- ORCID
- Venue
- Brain
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2022-12-14
- Volume
- 146
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2584-2594
- ISSN
- 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2156
- PMC
- PMC10232290
- OpenAlex
- W4311398739
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3
- FWCI
- 2.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Brain (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust (220258)
- Medical Research Council (MR/K02308X/1, MR/P01271X/1, SUAG/092 G116768, MC_U105597119, MC_U_00005/12, SUAG/004 91365)
- Cambridge University Centre for Parkinson-plus
- Association of British Neurologists
- Patrick Berthoud Charitable Trust
- Holt Fellowship
- National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014)
- Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (205103/Z/16/Z)
- Canada-UK Artificial Intelligence Initiative (ES/T01279X/1)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
- Keywords
- progressive supranuclear palsy, synaptic loss, tauopathy, synaptic density, dynamic causal modeling, magnetoencephalography, EEG, inferior frontal cortex, glutamatergic excitation, cognitive impairment, cortical microcircuits
- MeSH terms
- Atrophy, Bayes Theorem, Cognition Disorders, Humans, Supranuclear Palsy, Progressive, Cognitive Dysfunction
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