MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3113359054 · doi:10.1002/alz.042215

CO2 cerebrovascular reactivity measured with phase‐contrast MRI: A potential biomarker of cognition and physical function in older adults

2020· article· en· W3113359054 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sandeepa Sur, Zixuan Lin, Li Yang, Sevil Yaşar, Paul B. Rosenberg, Abhay Moghekar, Shruti Agarwal, Xirui Hou, Dengrong Jiang, Rita R. Kalyani, Kaisha Hazel, George Pottanat, Cuimei Xu, Peter C.M. van Zijl, Jay J. Pillai, Peiying Liu, Marilyn S. Albert, Hanzhang Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionCardiologyCerebral blood flowMedicineClinical Dementia RatingCognitive declineInternal medicineMagnetic resonance imagingPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAudiologyPhysical therapyDiseaseRadiologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Vascular cognitive decline is a prominent cause of late‐life cognitive impairment. Compared to Alzheimer’s disease(AD), there is a paucity of biomarkers for its diagnosis, stratification, and treatment monitoring. Cerebrovascular‐Reactivity(CVR) MRI measures small‐vessel dilation to vasoactive‐stimuli(e.g. CO2), and has been shown to be associated with cognitive impairment. However, previous CVR studies were based on Blood‐Oxygenation‐Level‐Dependent (BOLD) MRI signal, which reflects a complex interplay of many physiological parameters and thus presents interpretation challenges. We measured CVR using quantitative CBF‐imaging in older participants, and tested for associations with diagnosis (Healthy Control [HC] vs. mild‐cognitive‐impairment [MCI] vs. dementia) cognitive and physical function, amyloid and tau burden, and vascular risk. Methods A cross‐sectional study enrolled 67 participants aged 69±6.5 years (22 HC, 37 MCI, 8 dementia). MoCA (Montreal‐Cognitive‐Assessment) and composite cognition (a z‐score average of 4‐domains: verbal‐memory, executive‐function, language, processing‐speed) assessed overall cognition. Gait(sec,4‐meter‐walk) and chair‐stands (sec,5‐chair‐stands) assessed physical‐function. Clinical Dementia Rating(CDR)7 indexed disease‐severity. Phase‐contrast flow MRI(3T) was performed while participants breathed room‐air for 1‐minute, followed by ‘CO2‐enriched‐air’(5%CO2, 21%O2, 74%N2) for 2‐minutes. Blood‐flux at Superior‐Sagittal‐Sinus(SSS)(Figure‐1) was quantified for both states. Breathing rate and End‐tidal(Et)‐CO2 were recorded via capnography. CBF‐based CVR was then obtained by: CBF‐CVR = [HypercapniaSSSflux(ml/min)‐RoomairSSSflux(ml/min)]/RoomairSSSflux(ml/min) HypercapniaEtCo2(mmHg)‐RoomairEtCo2(mmHg) FLAIR‐MRI‐images were assigned Fazekas‐scores by a neuroradiologist. AD‐Biomarkers Aβ40, Aβ42, tau, and p‐tau181(pg/ml), were measured in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and vascular‐biomarkers HbA1c (mg/dL), homocysteine (umol/l), HDL(mg/dL), and LDL (mg/dL) in blood. Vascular‐Risk‐Score (VRS) is a composite score based on the presence of hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, smoking or obesity (body mass index>30 kg/m2). Results Table‐1 summarizes participant‐demographics. CBF‐CVR (%/mmHg) differentiated diagnostic‐categories, and was lower in impaired vs. HC (p=0.027, Figure‐2a). Higher CBF‐CVR predicted better cognitive‐performance [MoCA(p=0.000089) (Figure‐2b), composite‐cognition (p=0.007) and language (p=0.000064)], physical function [faster gait(p=0.001), chair‐stands(p=0.021)], and disease‐severity [global‐CDR (p=0.003), CDR‐sum‐of‐boxes (p=0.001)(Table‐2). These relationships remained after adjusting for AD‐biomarkers. CBF‐CVR remained associated with cognition and physical‐function except chair‐stands, after adjusting for vascular‐markers: WMH‐Fazekas‐score, VRS, and whole‐brain‐CBF(Table‐2). CBF‐CVR was associated with HbA1c(p=0.007) and history of Diabetes (p=0.043), but not other blood biomarkers or VRS. Conclusion We show that a 3‐minute CBF‐based CVR MRI can differentiate diagnostic‐categories, and predict cognitive and physical function, independent of AD pathology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances→French-language works237,207→