Volume loss of the hippocampus and temporal lobe in healthy elderly persons destined to develop dementia
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine initial locus and rate of degeneration of temporal lobe structures (total lobe, hippocampus and parahippocampus) in preclinical dementia. BACKGROUND: Postmortem studies suggest that the earliest changes in Alzheimer's disease are neurofibrillary tangle formation in hippocampus and adjacent cortex. MRI volume analysis of temporal lobe structures over time in subjects prior to developing dementia may allow the identification of when these processes begin, the rate they develop, and which areas are key to symptom development. METHODS: 30 nondemented (NoD), healthy, elderly individuals enrolled in a prospective study of healthy aging evaluated annually over a mean of 42 months. Twelve subjects with subsequent cognitive decline were assigned to the preclinical dementia group (PreD). All 120 annual MRI studies analyzed by volumetric techniques assessed group differences in temporal lobe volumes and rates of brain loss. RESULTS: NoD as well as PreD subjects had significant, time-dependent decreases in hippocampal and parahippocampal volume. Rates of volume loss between the groups did not significantly differ. PreD cases had significantly smaller hippocampi when asymptomatic. Parahippocampal volume did not differ between PreD and NoD cases. Significant time-dependent temporal lobe atrophy was present only in PreD. CONCLUSIONS: Hippocampal and parahippocampal atrophy occurs at a similar rate regardless of diagnostic group. Those who develop dementia may have smaller hippocampi to begin with, but become symptomatic because of accelerated loss of temporal lobe volume. Temporal lobe volume loss may mark the beginning of the disease process within six years prior to dementia onset.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 stable control rate is comparable to the −2.09% described for older controls by another group (25).
“The rate which we calculated in this study for stable controls (−1.73%/year) is very close to the −1.55%/year which we calculated in a previous study (6), and is comparable to that described for older controls (−2.09%) by another group (25).”
From Rates of hippocampal atrophy correlate with change in clinical status in aging and AD (2000) · cites this paper as [25]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 38 · Cited by 399
- Authors
- Kaye, J. A., Swihart, T., Howieson, D., Dame, A., Moore, M. M., Karnos, T., Camicioli, R., Ball, M., Oken, B., & Sexton, G.
- Affiliations
- Oregon Health & Science University (US)
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 1997-05
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1297-1304
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- OpenAlex
- W1970240370
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 15.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Neurology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (AG 08017, P30AG008017)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
- Keywords
- hippocampal atrophy, temporal lobe atrophy, preclinical dementia, Alzheimer's disease, brain atrophy, healthy aging, cognitive decline, neurofibrillary tangles, hippocampus
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Dementia, Female, Forecasting, Hippocampus, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Reference Values, Temporal Lobe, Discriminant Analysis
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