E.S. KOLUPAEVA, I.A. ZHUKOVA, N.G. ZHUKOVA, I.V. TOLMACHEV, O.P. IZHBOLDINA, Yu.S. MIRONOVA, A.V. LATYPOVA

Siberian State Medical University, Tomsk

 Contact details:

Kolupaeva E.S. — post-graduate student of the Neurology and Neurosurgery Department

Address: 11 Neftyanaya Str., apt. 162, Russian Federation, Tomsk, 634045, tel.: +7-923-405-23-27, e-mail: [email protected]

The purpose — to study the morphometric data of the brain in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) as a possible additional instrumental paraclinical neuroimaging marker to verify the accuracy of the diagnosis.

Material and methods. We examined 27 patients with Alzheimer’s disease: 14 (51,9%) men and 13 (45,1%) women, average age 74,5 ± 8,7 years with a probable diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease, anamnestic type. All patients received standard combination therapy with anti-dementia drugs. The patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, followed by automated image segmentation and neuropsychological examination using the Montreal scale for assessing cognitive functions.

Results. In our study, no statistically significant correlations were found between the data of neuropsychological testing, educational level, age, gender, and volumes of gray and white matter of the brain.

Conclusion. According to the study, indicators of the volume of gray and white matter of the brain are not recommended as an additional neuroimaging marker of AD.

Key words: Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, cognitive impairments, morphometry, neuropsychological testing.

REFERENCES

1. Lane C.A., Hardy J., Schott J.M. Alzheimer’s disease. European Journal of Neurology, 2018, vol. 25 (1), pp. 59–70.
2. Prince M., Albanese E., Guerchet M., Prina M. Dementia and risk reduction. An analysis of protective and modifiable factors. World Alzheimer Report, 2014.
3. Vasenina E.E., Levin O.S. Features of the clinical picture and treatment of moderate and severe Alzheimer’s disease. Zhurnal nevrologii i psikhiatrii im. C.C. Korsakova, 2015, vol. 115, no. 6-2, pp. 17–25 (in Russ.).
4. Koberskaya N.N. Alzheimer’s disease: new diagnostic criteria and therapeutic aspects depending on the stage of the disease. Meditsinskiy sovet, 2017, vol. 10, pp. 18–24 (in Russ.).
5. Frisoni G.B., Boccardi M., Barkhof F. et al. Strategic roadmap for a nearly diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease based on biomarkers. The Lancet Neurology, 2017, vol.16 (8), pp. 661–676.
6. El-Gamal A., Elmogy M.M., Ghazal M. et al. Medical imaging diagnosis of early Alzheimers disease. Frontiers in Bioscience, 2018, vol. 23 (2), pp. 671–725.
7. Hampel H., O’Bryant S.E., Molinuevo J.L. et al. Blood-based biomarkers for Alzheimer disease: mapping the road to the clinic. Nature Reviews Neurology, 2018, vol. 14 (11), pp. 639–652.
8. Horvath A., Szucs A., Csukly G.et al. EEG and ERP biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease: a critical review. Frontiers in Bioscience, 2018, vol. 23 (1), pp.183–220.

9. Trzepacz P.T., Hochstetler H., Wang S. et al. Relationship between the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-mental State Examination for assessment of mild cognitive impairment in older adults. BMC Geriatrics, 2015, vol. 15, p. 107.
10. Amoroso N., La Rocca M., Bruno S. et al. Multiplex networks for early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 2018, vol. 10, p. 385.
11. Pinto T.C.C., Machado L., Bulgacov T.M. et al. Is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) screening superior to the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in the detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in the elderly? International Psychogeriatrics, 2018, vol. 31 (4), pp. 1–14.
12. McKhann G., Drachman D., Folstein M. et al. Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: report of the NINCDS-ADRDA work group under the auspices of department of health and human services task force on Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology, 1984, vol. 34 (7), pp. 939–944.
13. Bayram E., Caldwell J.Z.K., Banks S.J. Current understanding of magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers and memory in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions, 2018, vol. 4 (1), pp. 395–413.
14. Ha S.Y., Youn Y.C., Kim S. et al. A voxel-based morphometric study of cortical gray matter volume changes in Alzheimer’s disease with white matter hyperintensities. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 2012, vol. 19 (11), pp. 1506–1510.
15. Brunetti A., Postiglione A., Tedeschi E. et al. Measurement of global brain atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease with unsupervised segmentation of spin-echo MRI studies. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2000, vol. 11 (3), pp. 260–266.
16. Karas G.B., Scheltens P., Rombouts S.A. et al. Global and local gray matter loss in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroimage, 2004, vol. 23 (2), pp. 708–716.
17. McKhann G.M., Knopman D.S., Chertkow H. et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions, 2011, vol. 7 (3), pp. 263–269.
18. Emelin A.Yu. New criteria for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Nevrologiya, neyropsikhiatriya, psikhosomatika, 2011, vol. 3 (4), pp. 5–8.
19. Hodges J.R. Alzheimer’s disease and the frontotemporal dementias: contributions to clinico-pathological studies, diagnosis, and cognitive neuroscience. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 2013, vol. 33, pp. 211–217.
20. Falgàs N., Sánchez-Valle R., Bargalló N.et al. Hippocampal atrophy has limited usefulness as a diagnostic biomarker on the early onset Alzheimer’s disease patients: A comparison between visual and quantitative assessment. Neuroimage: Clinical, 2019, vol. 23, pp. 101–927.
21. Ferreira D., Cavallin L., Larsson E-M. et al. Practical cut-offs for visual rating scales of medial temporal, frontal and posterior atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Internal Medicine, 2018, vol. 278 (3), pp. 277–290.
22. MKB-10. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. 10-y peresmotr. Zheneva, 1995, vol. 1 (1), p. 698.
23. Morris J.C. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): Current version and scoring rules. Neurology, 1993, vol. 43 (11), pp. 2412–2416.
24. Fischl B. FreeSurfer. Neuroimage, 2012, vol. 62 (2), pp. 774–781.
25. Eichenbaum H. Memory: Organization and Control. Annual Review of Psychology, 2017, vol. 68 (1), pp. 19–45.
26. Levin O.S. Algoritmy diagnostiki i lecheniya dementsii [Algorithms for the diagnosis and treatment of dementia]. Moscow: Medpress-inform, 2018.
27. Nie X., Sun Y., Wan S. et al. Subregional structural alterations in hippocampus and nucleus accumbens correlate with the clinical impairment in patients with Alzheimer’s disease clinical spectrum: parallel combining volume and vertex-based approach. Frontiers in Neurology, 2017, vol. 8, pp. 399.
28. Olsen R.K., Yeung L-K., Noly-Gandon A. Human anterolateral entorhinal cortex volumes are associated with cognitive decline in aging prior to clinical diagnosis. Neurobiology of Aging, 2017, vol. 57, pp. 195–205.
29. Gupta M., King K.S., Srinivasa R. et al. Association of 3.0-T brain magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers with cognitive function in the Dallas heart study. JAMA Neurology, 2015, vol. 72 (2), pp. 170–175.
30. Risacher S.L., Anderson W.H., Charil A. et al. Alzheimer disease brain atrophy subtypes are associated with cognition and rate of decline. Neurology, 2017, vol. 89 (21), pp. 2176–2186.