4.5 Article

Longitudinal changes of cortical thickness in early- versus late-onset Alzheimer's disease

期刊

NEUROBIOLOGY OF AGING
卷 34, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.01.004

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; Onset age; Early onset; Cortical thickness; Longitudinal study

资金

  1. Korea Healthcare Technology RD Project
  2. Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea [A102065, A110719, A070001]
  3. Korean Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF) NRL program grant
  4. Korean government (MEST) [2011-0028333]
  5. Samsung Medical Center Clinical Research Development Program grant [CRL-108011, CRS 110-14-1]
  6. Converging Research Center Program through the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology [2010K001054]
  7. Korea Health Promotion Institute [A110719] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Early-onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) has been shown to progress more rapidly than late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD). However, no studies have compared the topography of brain volume reduction over time. The purpose of this 3-year longitudinal study was to compare EOAD and LOAD in terms of their rates of decline in cognitive testing and topography of cortical thinning. We prospectively recruited 36 patients with AD (14 EOAD and 22 LOAD) and 14 normal controls. All subjects were assessed with neuropsychological tests and with magnetic resonance imaging at baseline, Year 1, and Year 3. The EOAD group showed more rapid decline than the LOAD group in attention, language, and frontal-executive tests. The EOAD group also showed more rapid cortical thinning in widespread association cortices. In contrast, the LOAD group presented more rapid cortical thinning than the EOAD group only in the left parahippocampal gyrus. Our study suggests that patients with EOAD show more rapid cortical atrophy than patients with LOAD, which accounts for faster cognitive decline on neuropsychological tests. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据