4.5 Article

Development, validation and application of a new fornix template for studies of aging and preclinical Alzheimer's disease

期刊

NEUROIMAGE-CLINICAL
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 106-115

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2016.11.024

关键词

Fornix; Diffusion tensor imaging; Aging; A beta amyloid; Tau

资金

  1. National Institute on Aging
  2. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [RO1AG033036, P30AG028383, P01AG030128, TL1TR000115]
  3. [P30AG10124]
  4. [U01AG24904]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We developed a merged younger-older adult template of the fornix and demonstrated its utility for studies of aging and preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD). In Experiment 1, probabilistic tractography was used to reconstruct the fornix in younger and older adults and successful streamlines were then averaged to create a merged template in standard space. The new template includes the majority of the fornix from the hippocampal formation to the subcallosal region and the thalamus/hypothalamus. In Experiment 2, the merged template was validated as an appropriate measure for studies of aging, with comparisons against manual tracing measures indicating identical spatial coverage in younger and older adult groups. In Experiment 3, the merged template was found to outperform age-specific templates in measures of sensitivity and specificity computed on diffusion tensor imaging data of an independent participant cohort. In Experiment 4, relevance to preclinical AD was demonstrated via associations between fractional anisotropy within the new fornix template and cerebrospinal fluid markers of AD pathology (A beta(42) and the t-tau/A beta(42) ratio) in a third independent cohort of cognitively normal older adults. Our new template provides an appropriate measure for use in future studies seeking to characterize microstructural alterations in the fornix associated with aging and preclinical AD. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

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