Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec 1;141(12):3443-3456.
doi: 10.1093/brain/awy264.

Atrophy subtypes in prodromal Alzheimer's disease are associated with cognitive decline

Affiliations

Atrophy subtypes in prodromal Alzheimer's disease are associated with cognitive decline

Mara Ten Kate et al. Brain. .

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease is a heterogeneous disorder. Understanding the biological basis for this heterogeneity is key for developing personalized medicine. We identified atrophy subtypes in Alzheimer's disease dementia and tested whether these subtypes are already present in prodromal Alzheimer's disease and could explain interindividual differences in cognitive decline. First we retrospectively identified atrophy subtypes from structural MRI with a data-driven cluster analysis in three datasets of patients with Alzheimer's disease dementia: discovery data (dataset 1: n = 299, age = 67 ± 8, 50% female), and two independent external validation datasets (dataset 2: n = 181, age = 66 ± 7, 52% female; dataset 3: n = 227, age = 74 ± 8, 44% female). Subtypes were compared on clinical, cognitive and biological characteristics. Next, we classified prodromal Alzheimer's disease participants (n = 603, age = 72 ± 8, 43% female) according to the best matching subtype to their atrophy pattern, and we tested whether subtypes showed cognitive decline in specific domains. In all Alzheimer's disease dementia datasets we consistently identified four atrophy subtypes: (i) medial-temporal predominant atrophy with worst memory and language function, older age, lowest CSF tau levels and highest amount of vascular lesions; (ii) parieto-occipital atrophy with poor executive/attention and visuospatial functioning and high CSF tau; (iii) mild atrophy with best cognitive performance, young age, but highest CSF tau levels; and (iv) diffuse cortical atrophy with intermediate clinical, cognitive and biological features. Prodromal Alzheimer's disease participants classified into one of these subtypes showed similar subtype characteristics at baseline as Alzheimer's disease dementia subtypes. Compared across subtypes in prodromal Alzheimer's disease, the medial-temporal subtype showed fastest decline in memory and language over time; the parieto-occipital subtype declined fastest on executive/attention domain; the diffuse subtype in visuospatial functioning; and the mild subtype showed intermediate decline in all domains. Robust atrophy subtypes exist in Alzheimer's disease with distinct clinical and biological disease expression. Here we observe that these subtypes can already be detected in prodromal Alzheimer's disease, and that these may inform on expected trajectories of cognitive decline.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
NMF in ADD patients and classification of prodromal Alzheimer’s disease participants. Grey matter segmentations were extracted from structural MRI and parcellated into 1024 equally-sized regions of interest, from which regional grey matter volumes were derived (for illustrative purposes only eight regions of interest are shown). In ADD patients, NMF, a dual-clustering approach, was used to identify clusters of features (in this case atrophy patterns) and participants at the same time. Top right: The regions of interest are clustered into distinct atrophy patterns. Each row represents a region of interest and each column an atrophy cluster. The warmer the colour, the more that region of interest contributes to the atrophy cluster. Middle: Subjects are grouped into subtypes based on the best fit of their region of interest volumes to each of the atrophy clusters. Each row represents one participant and the warmer the colour, the better the fit of that participants’ region of interest volumes to the region of interest volumes of that atrophy cluster. For each of the atrophy clusters, we made a cluster signature by computing the average volume in each of the top cluster-defining regions of interest across all ADD patients classified as that atrophy subtype. We classified prodromal Alzheimer’s disease participants based on the lowest absolute minimal distance between their own region of interest volumes and that of the cluster-signatures. AD = Alzheimer’s disease; CL = cluster; ROI = region of interest.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cluster features across datasets. (A) In each dataset we visualized the top 100 most important cluster-defining features. The bottom row represents the combined important cluster features across datasets: colour bars indicate whether the top 100 cluster-defining features were observed in 1/3, 2/3 or 3/3 datasets. Right hemisphere is displayed on the left side and vice versa. (B) Subtype-specific biomarker profiles: mean ± standard error (SE) of normalized values (z-scores) of CSF levels of amyloid-β1-42 (abeta42), t-tau and p-tau and WMH. (C) Subtype-specific cognitive profiles: mean ± SE of normalized values (z-scores) of neuropsychological composite scores for memory, language, visuospatial and executive/attention domains.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Atrophy patterns in each subtype. (A) Voxel-based morphometry comparison between atrophy subtypes and control (cognitively normal, amyloid negative) participants. (B) Voxel-based morphometry comparison between atrophy subtypes. Top row: In yellow-red regions where each subtype has most atrophy compared to all other clusters. Rows 2–5: In yellow-red pairwise comparisons between subtypes. Bottom row: In blue regions where each subtype has least atrophy (most grey matter) compared to all other subtypes. Colour bar represents t-statistic. Data are presented at voxel-level PFWE < 0.05. Right hemisphere is displayed on the left side and vice versa. ST1 = subtype 1 (medial-temporal dominant atrophy); ST2 = subtype 2 (parieto-occipital atrophy); ST3 = subtype 3 (mild atrophy); ST4 = subtype 4 (diffuse atrophy).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Biomarker and cognitive profile comparisons between subtypes. Data are presented as mean ± SE normalized values (z-scores). P-values are based on ANOVA tests. For neuropsychology, composite scores are presented. Abeta42 = amyloid-β1-42. (A) Biomarker profile comparisons between subtypes in ADD. (B) Cognitive profile comparisons between subtypes in ADD. (C) Biomarker profile comparisons between subtypes in prodromal Alzheimer’s disease. (D) Cognitive profile comparisons between subtypes in prodromal Alzheimer’s disease. Subtype 1 = medial-temporal atrophy; subtype 2 = parieto-occipital atrophy; subtype 3 = mild atrophy; subtype 4 = diffuse cortical atrophy.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Disease progression in prodromal Alzheimer’s disease for each of the four atrophy subtypes. (A) Progression curves for time to dementia onset within 3 years. (B) Decline over time in cognitive functioning in memory, language, visuospatial functioning and executive/attention plotted per subtype. Subtype 1 = medial-temporal atrophy; subtype 2 = parieto-occipital atrophy; subtype 3 = mild atrophy; subtype 4 = diffuse cortical atrophy.

Comment in

Similar articles

  • A generalizable data-driven model of atrophy heterogeneity and progression in memory clinic settings.
    Baumeister H, Vogel JW, Insel PS, Kleineidam L, Wolfsgruber S, Stark M, Gellersen HM, Yakupov R, Schmid MC, Lüsebrink F, Brosseron F, Ziegler G, Freiesleben SD, Preis L, Schneider LS, Spruth EJ, Altenstein S, Lohse A, Fliessbach K, Vogt IR, Bartels C, Schott BH, Rostamzadeh A, Glanz W, Incesoy EI, Butryn M, Janowitz D, Rauchmann BS, Kilimann I, Goerss D, Munk MH, Hetzer S, Dechent P, Ewers M, Scheffler K, Wuestefeld A, Strandberg O, van Westen D, Mattsson-Carlgren N, Janelidze S, Stomrud E, Palmqvist S, Spottke A, Laske C, Teipel S, Perneczky R, Buerger K, Schneider A, Priller J, Peters O, Ramirez A, Wiltfang J, Heneka MT, Wagner M, Düzel E, Jessen F, Hansson O, Berron D. Baumeister H, et al. Brain. 2024 Jul 5;147(7):2400-2413. doi: 10.1093/brain/awae118. Brain. 2024. PMID: 38654513 Free PMC article.
  • Modeling grey matter atrophy as a function of time, aging or cognitive decline show different anatomical patterns in Alzheimer's disease.
    Dicks E, Vermunt L, van der Flier WM, Visser PJ, Barkhof F, Scheltens P, Tijms BM; Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Dicks E, et al. Neuroimage Clin. 2019;22:101786. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101786. Epub 2019 Mar 19. Neuroimage Clin. 2019. PMID: 30921610 Free PMC article.
  • Heterogeneity of neuroanatomical patterns in prodromal Alzheimer's disease: links to cognition, progression and biomarkers.
    Dong A, Toledo JB, Honnorat N, Doshi J, Varol E, Sotiras A, Wolk D, Trojanowski JQ, Davatzikos C; Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Dong A, et al. Brain. 2017 Mar 1;140(3):735-747. doi: 10.1093/brain/aww319. Brain. 2017. PMID: 28003242 Free PMC article.
  • Disease tracking markers for Alzheimer's disease at the prodromal (MCI) stage.
    Drago V, Babiloni C, Bartrés-Faz D, Caroli A, Bosch B, Hensch T, Didic M, Klafki HW, Pievani M, Jovicich J, Venturi L, Spitzer P, Vecchio F, Schoenknecht P, Wiltfang J, Redolfi A, Forloni G, Blin O, Irving E, Davis C, Hårdemark HG, Frisoni GB. Drago V, et al. J Alzheimers Dis. 2011;26 Suppl 3:159-99. doi: 10.3233/JAD-2011-0043. J Alzheimers Dis. 2011. PMID: 21971460 Review.
  • Molecular imaging of dementia.
    Mori T, Maeda J, Shimada H, Higuchi M, Shinotoh H, Ueno S, Suhara T. Mori T, et al. Psychogeriatrics. 2012 Jun;12(2):106-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-8301.2012.00409.x. Psychogeriatrics. 2012. PMID: 22712644 Review.

Cited by

  • The Ventricular System Enlarges Abnormally in the Seventies, Earlier in Men, and First in the Frontal Horn: A Study Based on More Than 3,000 Scans.
    Currà A, Pierelli F, Gasbarrone R, Mannarelli D, Nofroni I, Matone V, Marinelli L, Trompetto C, Fattapposta F, Missori P. Currà A, et al. Front Aging Neurosci. 2019 Nov 5;11:294. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2019.00294. eCollection 2019. Front Aging Neurosci. 2019. PMID: 31749695 Free PMC article.
  • A generalizable data-driven model of atrophy heterogeneity and progression in memory clinic settings.
    Baumeister H, Vogel JW, Insel PS, Kleineidam L, Wolfsgruber S, Stark M, Gellersen HM, Yakupov R, Schmid MC, Lüsebrink F, Brosseron F, Ziegler G, Freiesleben SD, Preis L, Schneider LS, Spruth EJ, Altenstein S, Lohse A, Fliessbach K, Vogt IR, Bartels C, Schott BH, Rostamzadeh A, Glanz W, Incesoy EI, Butryn M, Janowitz D, Rauchmann BS, Kilimann I, Goerss D, Munk MH, Hetzer S, Dechent P, Ewers M, Scheffler K, Wuestefeld A, Strandberg O, van Westen D, Mattsson-Carlgren N, Janelidze S, Stomrud E, Palmqvist S, Spottke A, Laske C, Teipel S, Perneczky R, Buerger K, Schneider A, Priller J, Peters O, Ramirez A, Wiltfang J, Heneka MT, Wagner M, Düzel E, Jessen F, Hansson O, Berron D. Baumeister H, et al. Brain. 2024 Jul 5;147(7):2400-2413. doi: 10.1093/brain/awae118. Brain. 2024. PMID: 38654513 Free PMC article.
  • Analyzing large Alzheimer's disease cognitive datasets: Considerations and challenges.
    Bellio M, Oxtoby NP, Walker Z, Henley S, Ribbens A, Blandford A, Alexander DC, Yong KXX. Bellio M, et al. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2020 Dec 7;12(1):e12135. doi: 10.1002/dad2.12135. eCollection 2020. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2020. PMID: 33313379 Free PMC article.
  • Multi-scale semi-supervised clustering of brain images: Deriving disease subtypes.
    Wen J, Varol E, Sotiras A, Yang Z, Chand GB, Erus G, Shou H, Abdulkadir A, Hwang G, Dwyer DB, Pigoni A, Dazzan P, Kahn RS, Schnack HG, Zanetti MV, Meisenzahl E, Busatto GF, Crespo-Facorro B, Rafael RG, Pantelis C, Wood SJ, Zhuo C, Shinohara RT, Fan Y, Gur RC, Gur RE, Satterthwaite TD, Koutsouleris N, Wolf DH, Davatzikos C; Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Wen J, et al. Med Image Anal. 2022 Jan;75:102304. doi: 10.1016/j.media.2021.102304. Epub 2021 Nov 11. Med Image Anal. 2022. PMID: 34818611 Free PMC article.
  • Distinct tau PET patterns in atrophy-defined subtypes of Alzheimer's disease.
    Ossenkoppele R, Lyoo CH, Sudre CH, van Westen D, Cho H, Ryu YH, Choi JY, Smith R, Strandberg O, Palmqvist S, Westman E, Tsai R, Kramer J, Boxer AL, Gorno-Tempini ML, La Joie R, Miller BL, Rabinovici GD, Hansson O. Ossenkoppele R, et al. Alzheimers Dement. 2020 Feb;16(2):335-344. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2019.08.201. Epub 2020 Jan 4. Alzheimers Dement. 2020. PMID: 31672482 Free PMC article.

References

    1. Blennow K, Mattsson N, Schöll M, Hansson O, Zetterberg H. Amyloid biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2015; 36: 297–309. - PubMed
    1. Byun MS, Kim SE, Park J, Yi D, Choe YM, Sohn BK, et al. . Heterogeneity of regional brain atrophy patterns associated with distinct progression rates in Alzheimer’s disease. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0142756-16. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dice L. Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 1945; 26: 297–302.
    1. Dong A, Toledo JB, Honnorat N, Doshi J, Varol E, Sotiras A, et al. . Heterogeneity of neuroanatomical patterns in prodromal Alzheimer’s disease: links to cognition, progression and biomarkers. Brain 2017; 140: 735–47. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dubois B, Feldman HH, Jacova C, Hampel H, Molinuevo JL, Blennow K, et al. . Advancing research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s disease: the IWG-2 criteria. Lancet Neurol 2014; 13: 614–29. - PubMed

Publication types