Cited by 141Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

Cognitive and Brain Profiles Associated with Current Neuroimaging Biomarkers of Preclinical Alzheimer's Disease

Open access
Besson, F. L., La Joie, R., Doeuvre, L., Gaubert, M., Mezenge, F., Egret, S., Landeau, B., Barre, L. +6 more·2015·Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Neuroimaging biomarkers, namely hippocampal volume loss, temporoparietal hypometabolism, and neocortical β-amyloid (Aβ) deposition, are included in the recent research criteria for preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, how to use these biomarkers is still being debated, especially regarding their sequence. Our aim was to characterize the cognitive and brain profiles of elders classified as positive or negative for each biomarker to further our understanding of their use in the preclinical diagnosis of AD. Fifty-four cognitively normal individuals (age = 65.8 ± 8.3 years) underwent neuropsychological tests (structural MRI, FDG-PET, and Florbetapir-PET) and were dichotomized into positive or negative independently for each neuroimaging biomarker. Demographic, neuropsychological, and neuroimaging data were compared between positive and negative subgroups. The MRI-positive subgroup had lower executive performances and mixed patterns of lower volume and metabolism in AD-characteristic regions and in the prefrontal cortex. The FDG-positive subgroup showed only hypometabolism, predominantly in AD-sensitive areas extending to the whole neocortex, compared with the FDG-negative subgroup. The amyloid-positive subgroup was older and included more APOE ε4 carriers compared with the amyloid-negative subgroup. When considering MRI and/or FDG biomarkers together (i.e., the neurodegeneration-positive), there was a trend for an inverse relationship with Aβ deposition such that those with neurodegeneration tended to show less Aβ deposition and the reverse was true as well. Our findings suggest that: (1) MRI and FDG biomarkers provide complementary rather than redundant information and (2) relatively young cognitively normal elders tend to have either neurodegeneration or Aβ deposition, but not both, suggesting additive rather than sequential/causative links between AD neuroimaging biomarkers at this age. Significance statement: Neuroimaging biomarkers are included in the recent research criteria for preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, how to use these biomarkers is still being debated, especially regarding their sequence. Our findings suggest that MRI and FDG-PET biomarkers should be used in combination, offering an additive contribution instead of reflecting the same process of neurodegeneration. Moreover, the present study also challenges the hierarchical use of the neuroimaging biomarkers in preclinical AD because it suggests that the neurodegeneration observed in this population is not due to β-amyloid deposition. Rather, our results suggest that β-amyloid- and tau-related pathological processes may interact but not necessarily appear in a systematic sequence.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.0150-15.2015

Cites

64 of 64 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

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [48]48. Signoret J (1991) Batterie d'efficience mne ´sique BEM 144 [book in French]. Paris: Elsevier.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Besson, F. L., La Joie, R., Doeuvre, L., Gaubert, M., Mezenge, F., Egret, S., Landeau, B., Barre, L., Abbas, A., Ibazizene, M., de La Sayette, V., Desgranges, B., Eustache, F., & Chetelat, G.
Affiliations
Inserm (FR)
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2015-07-22
Volume
35
Issue
29
Pages
10402-10411
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1519378085
Cited by
141
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 4
FWCI
13.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
preclinical Alzheimer's disease, neuroimaging biomarkers, hippocampal atrophy, FDG-PET, amyloid-beta deposition, executive function, APOE ε4, prefrontal cortex, cognitive profile, older adults
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Brain, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Nerve Degeneration, Neuropsychological Tests, Biomarkers, Positron-Emission Tomography, Plaque, Amyloid, Neuroimaging, Cognitive Dysfunction, Multimodal Imaging

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