MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210538084 · doi:10.1002/alz.051221

Atrophy patterns in sporadic and genetic behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia reflect brain network architecture

2021· article· en· W4210538084 on OpenAlexaff
Golia Shafiei, Vincent Bazinet, Mahsa Dadar, Ana L. Manera, D. Louis Collins, Alain Dagher, Martina Bocchetta, Emily Todd, Georgia Peakman, David M. Cash, Rhian S. Convery, Lucy L. Russell, David L. Thomas, Juan Eugenio Iglesias, John C. van Swieten, Lize C. Jiskoot, Harro Seelaar, Barbara Borroni, Daniela Galimberti, Raquel Sánchez‐Valle, Robert Laforce, Fermín Moreno, Matthis Synofzik, Caroline Graff, Mario Masellis, Maria Carmela Tartaglia, James B. Rowe, Rik Vandenberghe, Elizabeth Finger, Fabrizio Tagliavini, Alexandre de Mendonça, Isabel Santana, Christopher Butler, Alexander Gerhard, Adrian Danek, Johannes Levin, Markus Otto, Sandro Sorbi, Isabelle Le Ber, Florence Pasquier, Jonathan D. Rohrer, Bratislav Misic, Simon Ducharme

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityOccupational Cancer Research CentreSunnybrook HospitalHôpital de l'Enfant-JésusMcGill UniversityUniversité LavalUniversity of TorontoMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrophyFrontotemporal dementiaPathologyNeuroscienceNeurodegenerationPathologicalDementiaBiologyMedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Connections among brain regions allow pathological perturbations to spread from a single source node to multiple nodes. Patterns of neurodegeneration in multiple diseases, including behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), resemble the network architecture (Seeley et al., 2009, Neuron), but how bvFTD‐related atrophy patterns relate to the network organization remains unknown. Here we investigate whether neurodegeneration patterns in sporadic and genetic bvFTD are conditioned by connectome architecture, such that connected regions display similar atrophy patterns. Method Deformation‐based morphometry (DBM) was used to estimate regional changes in tissue volume density from T1‐weighted magnetic resonance images of 75 genetic bvFTD patients and 247 healthy controls (GENFI, http://genfi.org.uk/). We used linear mixed effects model to obtain a bvFTD‐related atrophy map, controlling for age, sex and aquision site. Structural and functional connectivity (SC and FC), derived from an independent sample of 70 healthy participants (Griffa et al., 2019, Zenodo), were used to estimate mean neighbor atrophy values of each region. Relationship between node and neighbor atrophy was examined by correlating neighbor atrophy with nodal atrophy. Statistical significance of the analyses was assessed using a spatial autocorrelation‐preserving null model. Analyses were replicated in an independent dataset (FTLDNI, AG032306) with 70 sporadic bvFTD patients and 123 healthy controls. Result Distributed atrophy patterns were observed in bvFTD, mainly targeting areas associated with limbic intrinsic network and insular cytoarchitectonic class (Fig 1a). A node’s atrophy was significantly correlated with atrophy of its connected neighbors (e.g. high resolution: r=0.58, p=0.006 and r=0.54, p=0.0006, for SC‐ and FC‐ defined neighbors respectively) (Fig 2c). Relationship between node and neighbor atrophy was consistent across resolutions and greater in empirical networks compared to null networks. While a number of frontotemporal regions were identified as potential disease epicenters, anterior insula was the most likely one. Results were consistent in the sporadic cohort (Fig 1b&2d). Conclusion Using connectivity models and rigorous statistical analyses that account for spatial autocorrelation, we demonstrate that bvFTD‐related neurodegeneration is conditioned by connectome architecture, accounting for 30‐40% of variance in atrophy. Atrophy is most profound in regions associated with insular cortex.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies→French-language works237,207→