Tiago Constantino1,2,3, André Santos Ribeiro4, Ricardo Maximiano3, John Mcgonigle4, David Nutt4, and Hugo Alexandre Ferreira3
1Lisbon School of Health Technology-ESTeSL, Lisbon, Portugal, 2Spitalzentrum Biel, Biel, Switzerland, 3Institute of Biophysics and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Sciences of the University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal, 4Centre for Neuropsychopharmacology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
Synopsis
In this work we propose a comparison study between “Scans Without Evidence for Dopaminergic Deficit" (SWEDD) and Parkinson’s Disease (PD) patients against healthy subjects using the MIBCA toolbox. Here, we studied the difference in imaging and connectivity metrics obtained from anatomical (T1-weighted) and structural (Diffusion Tensor Imaging) data between the three groups. Results showed increased mean diffusivity in the frontal pole, rostral middle frontal gyrus and superior frontal gyrus between SWEDD and PD patients, which can be related with the dopaminergic mesocortical pathway degeneration in PD. These preliminary results help clarify the differences between SWEDD and PD patients.Purpose
Patients
with “Scans Without Evidence for Dopaminergic Deficit" (SWEDD) are those
that do not show dopamine deficiency nor any imaging irregularity that would
diagnose them as actually having Parkinson’s Disease (PD). Presently, there is
an on-going controversy about SWEDD being a PD look-alike disease or a benign
subtype of PD.
1 In order to shed some light on the topic, in this
study we investigated the changes in structural connectivity (SC) of patients
diagnosed with PD or SWEDD, which to our best knowledge has not been done yet.
Methods
We studied 89 subjects (30 healthy subjects, 29 patients with SWEDD and
30 PD patients) obtained from the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative
(PPMI) database (https://ida.loni.usc.edu/).
The MRI sequence protocol included T1-weighted (T1-w) and Diffusion Tensor
Imaging (DTI) data acquisition using a 3T scanner (TrioTim, SIEMENS, Erlangen,
Germany) and an 8-channel head coil. T1-w sequence (3D MP-RAGE) parameters
included: acquisition in the sagittal plane; 240 Slices; TR/TE/TI=2300/2.98/900
ms; Flip angle=90 degrees; Matrix=240x256; Voxel size=1x1x1.2 mm
3.
The DTI sequence (2D Echo Planar Imaging) parameters included acquisition in
the coronal plane; 116 Slices; TR/TE=890/88 ms; Flip angle=90 degrees; 64
gradients directions; b=0,1000 s/mm
2; Matrix =176 x 176; Voxel
size=2x2x2 mm
3. All data were automatically processed and analysed
using the Multimodal Imaging Brain Connectivity Analysis (MIBCA) toolbox2.
Imaging metrics such as cortical thickness (CThk), cortical area (CAr), and
volume were obtained from T1-w data for all 96 regions-of-interest (ROIs),
parcellated using Freesurfer atlases, as well as Mean Diffusibility (MD),
Fractional Anisotropy (FA) and number of fibers between ROIs (FiberConn) from
DTI-data. Additionally, SC matrices were computed from FiberConn data, as well
as derived connectivity metrics such as node degree (Deg), clustering
coefficient (ClusC), edge betweenness centrality (EdgeBetw) and distance.
3
Demographics
data such as gender, age, years of education and Unified Parkinson Disease Rating
Scale (UPDRS) scores were compared between groups using parametric or
non-parametric tests, as appropriate, in IBM SPSS. Differences between groups
were also evaluated regarding imaging and connectivity metrics, and FiberConn,
using MIBCA’s statistical functions, and differences were visualised in
connectograms. A significance of p<0.05 was used for all the tests.
Results and Discussion
Regarding demographics data the groups were gender, age, and years of
education matched, and showed statistical differences (Mann-Whitney U-test) in
UPDRS between healthy subjects (Control) group and PD (p=0.000) and SWEDD
(p=0.000) groups. This implies that the differences found in subsequent
analysis are most probably related to pathology rather than other confounding variables.
Figure 1 and 2 show the statistical differences between the
various groups: Control vs PD, Control vs SWEDD and PD vs SWEDD.
Control vs PD. Several differences were observed regarding various
imaging and connectivity metrics, particularly in the basal ganglia of
both hemispheres. In the right hemisphere, the Nucleus Accumbens showed
decreased MD and increased FA, FiberConn and EdgeBetw. These changes were
similarly observed for the rostral middle frontal Gyrus (rMFG) of both
hemispheres. These findings may be related with known degeneration of
dopaminergic pathways, including the nigrostriatal, mesocortical and mesolimbic
pathways, in PD.
4,5
Control vs SWEDD. The splenium of the corpus callosum showed decreased
MD and Deg and increased FA and FiberConn. Regions of the frontal and parietal
lobes showed many connectivity metrics changes, particularly the superior
marginal gyrus and superior parietal gyrus of both hemispheres and the pars
orbitallis of the left hemisphere. These results show changes in distinct
regions than the ones observed for PD, supporting the idea that SWEDD to be a
distinct nosological entity or entities.
1,6
PD
vs SWEDD. In the frontal lobe of both hemispheres, various DTI-based imaging
and connectivity metrics changes were observed, particularly in the frontal
pole, rMFG and superior frontal gyrus, regions of the mesocortical pathway. In
the limbic lobe changes were observed in the isthmus of the cingulate gyrus and
parahippocampal gyrus of both hemispheres, which may be related to memory impairment.
7
In the insular cortex of both hemispheres a decreased FA decrease and
increased MD and ClusC were observed. These findings could be related to
cognitive decline, behavioural abnormalities and somatosensory disturbances.
8Conclusions
All results observed in this study are in agreement with the literature regarding observed changes in regions related to the nigrostriatal, mesocortical and mesolimbic pathways. These findings suggest that the study of SC an important method to distinguish SWEDD and PD.
Acknowledgements
Data used in the preparation of this abstract were obtained from the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative
(PPMI) database (www.ppmi-info.org/data). For up-to-date information on the study, visit www.ppmi-info.org.
PPMI—a
public-private partnership—is funded by the Michael J. Fox Foundation
for Parkinson’s Research and its
funding partners, which include Abbvie, Avid, Biogen, Bristol-Myers
Squibb, Covance, GE Healthcare, Genentech, GalaxoSmithKline, Lilly,
Lundbeck, Merck, Meso Scale Discovery, Pfizer, Piramal, Roche, Servier
and UCB—for a current list see http://www.ppmi-info.org/about-ppmi/who-we-are/study-sponsors/.
Research supported by the Edmond J. Safra Philanthropic Foundation, and Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) and Ministério da Ciência e Educação (MCE) Portugal (PIDDAC) under
grants UID/BIO/00645/2013 and PTDC/SAU-ENB/120718/2010.
References
1.
Erro R,
Schneider SA, Quinn NP, et al. What do patients with scans without evidence of
dopaminergic deficit (SWEDD) have? New evidence and continuing controversies. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery &
Psychiatry. 2015. doi:10.1136/jnnp-2014-310256.
2. Santos-Ribeiro A, Lacerda LM, Ferreira HA. Multimodal Imaging Brain
Connectivity Analysis (MIBCA) toolbox. PeerJ. 2015;3:e1078.
3. Rubinov M, Sporns O. Complex network measures of brain connectivity:
uses and interpretations. NeuroImage. 2010;52(3):1059–1069.
4. Lewis SJG,
Dove A, Robbins TW, et al. Cognitive impairments in early Parkinson's disease
are accompanied by reductions in activity in frontostriatal neural circuitry. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2003;23(15):6351-6356.
5. Carriere N, Besson P, Dujardin
K, et al. Apathy in Parkinson's disease is associated with nucleus accumbens
atrophy: A magnetic resonance imaging shape analysis. Movement Disorders. 2014;29(7): 897-903.
6. Marek K, Seibyl J, Eberly S, et
al. Longitudinal follow-up of SWEDD subjects in the PRECEPT Study. Neurology. 2014;82(20):1791-1797.
7. Carlesimo
GA, Piras F, Assogna F, et al. Hippocampal abnormalities and memory deficits in
Parkinson disease - A multimodal imaging study. Neurology. 2012;78(24):1939-1945.
8. Christopher L, Koshimori Y, Lang
AE, et al. Uncovering the role of the insula in non-motor symptoms of
Parkinson’s disease. Brain.
2014;137(8):2143-2154.