Poster No:
1380
Submission Type:
Abstract Submission
Authors:
Yanin Suksangkharn1,2, Björn Schott3,4, Peter Zeidman5, Niklas Vockert2, René Lattmann2, Renat Yakupov1,2, Oliver Peter6,7, Josef Priller6,8,9,10, Anja Schneider11,12, Jens Wiltfang3,13,14, Frank Jessen11,15,16, Stefan Teipel17,18, Christoph Laske19,20, Annika Spottke11,21, Frederic Brosseron11, Falk Lüsebrink2, Stefan Hetzer22, Peter Dechent23, Klaus Scheffler24, Anne Maass2, Emrah Düzel1,2, Gabriel Ziegler1,2
Institutions:
1Institute of Cognitive Neurology and Dementia Research (IKND), Otto-von-Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany, 2German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Magdeburg, Germany, 3German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Göttingen, Germany, 4Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, 5Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, London, England, 6German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Berlin, Germany, 7Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Berlin, Germany, 8Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charité, Berlin, Germany, 9University of Edinburgh and UK DRI, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 10Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, and German Center for Mental Health (DZPG), Munich, Germany, 11German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Bonn, Germany, 12Department of Old Age Psychiatry and Cognitive Disorders, University Hospital Bonn and University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany, 13Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Göttingen, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, 14Neurosciences and Signaling Group, Institute of Biomedicine (iBiMED), Department of Medical Sciences, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal, 15Department of Psychiatry, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany, 16Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany, 17German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Rostock, Germany, 18Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Rostock University Medical Center, Rostock, Germany, 19German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Tübingen, Germany, 20Section for Dementia Research, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research and Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany, 21Department of Neurology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany, 22Berlin Center for Advanced Neuroimaging, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 23MR-Research in Neurosciences, Department of Cognitive Neurology, Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany, 24Department for Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
First Author:
Yanin Suksangkharn
Institute of Cognitive Neurology and Dementia Research (IKND), Otto-von-Guericke University|German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
Magdeburg, Germany|Magdeburg, Germany
Co-Author(s):
Björn Schott
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Göttingen
Göttingen, Germany|Göttingen, Germany
Peter Zeidman
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging
London, England
Niklas Vockert
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
Magdeburg, Germany
René Lattmann
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
Magdeburg, Germany
Renat Yakupov
Institute of Cognitive Neurology and Dementia Research (IKND), Otto-von-Guericke University|German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
Magdeburg, Germany|Magdeburg, Germany
Oliver Peter
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
Berlin, Germany|Berlin, Germany
Josef Priller
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charité|University of Edinburgh and UK DRI|Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, and German Center for Mental Health (DZPG)
Berlin, Germany|Berlin, Germany|Edinburgh, United Kingdom|Munich, Germany
Anja Schneider
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Department of Old Age Psychiatry and Cognitive Disorders, University Hospital Bonn and University of Bonn
Bonn, Germany|Bonn, Germany
Jens Wiltfang
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Göttingen, University of Göttingen|Neurosciences and Signaling Group, Institute of Biomedicine (iBiMED), Department of Medical Sciences, University of Aveiro
Göttingen, Germany|Göttingen, Germany|Aveiro, Portugal
Frank Jessen
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Department of Psychiatry, University of Cologne|Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne
Bonn, Germany|Cologne, Germany|Cologne, Germany
Stefan Teipel
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Rostock University Medical Center
Rostock, Germany|Rostock, Germany
Christoph Laske
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Section for Dementia Research, Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research and Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Tübingen
Tübingen, Germany|Tübingen, Germany
Annika Spottke
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)|Department of Neurology, University of Bonn
Bonn, Germany|Bonn, Germany
Falk Lüsebrink
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
Magdeburg, Germany
Stefan Hetzer
Berlin Center for Advanced Neuroimaging, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Berlin, Germany
Peter Dechent
MR-Research in Neurosciences, Department of Cognitive Neurology, Georg-August-University
Göttingen, Germany
Klaus Scheffler
Department for Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, University of Tübingen
Tübingen, Germany
Anne Maass
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
Magdeburg, Germany
Emrah Düzel
Institute of Cognitive Neurology and Dementia Research (IKND), Otto-von-Guericke University|German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
Magdeburg, Germany|Magdeburg, Germany
Gabriel Ziegler
Institute of Cognitive Neurology and Dementia Research (IKND), Otto-von-Guericke University|German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
Magdeburg, Germany|Magdeburg, Germany
Introduction:
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by beta-amyloid (Aβ) and tau protein accumulation, leading to neurodegeneration and cognitive decline (Jack et al., 2018). AD disrupts synaptic communication through complex spatiotemporal interactions (Tzioras et al., 2023), making it challenging to map its effects at the circuit level. This study aimed to disentangle the impact of AD pathology on memory circuit connectivity and identify alterations linked to memory performance. We employed Dynamic Causal Modelling (DCM) of a memory encoding network to quantify effective connectivity (EC) and further studied effects of AD pathology accounting for non-linear and interaction effects using generalized additive models (GAMs).
Methods:
We analyzed data from the DZNE DELCODE study, including 235 participants: 92 cognitively normal, 95 with subjective cognitive decline (SCD), 34 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 14 with mild dementia due to AD. Participants performed a visual memory-encoding fMRI task with novel and pre-familiarized images, followed by a recognition memory test for novel images to measure encoding performance. EC was assessed using DCM (Zeidman et al., 2019) in a memory-encoding network comprising the parahippocampal place area (PPA), hippocampus (HC), and precuneus (PCU) (Schott et al., 2023). The model included interregional and auto-inhibitory connectivity, modulated by individual recognition scores. Processing of novel images by the PPA was defined as driving input to the DCM. First, Spearman's correlations (|ρ| > 0.2, FDR-corrected) identified EC patterns associated with memory performance. We then evaluated the effects of ATN AD biomarkers (Aβ42/40 ratio, p-tau, hippocampal volume) on these ECs using pyGAM (Servén et al., 2018). Models included spline terms for Aβ42/40 and p-tau, their interaction, hippocampal volume, and covariates like age, sex, and education. Corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AICc; Hurvich & Tsai, 1989) guided model selection.
Results:
Four ECs were associated with memory performance: PPA to HC (ρ = 0.22, p < 0.001), PCU to PPA (ρ = 0.26, p < 0.001), PPA to PCU (ρ = −0.25, p < 0.001), and HC to PPA (ρ = −0.24, p < 0.001). The EC from PPA to HC was best explained by (spline terms of) Aβ42/40, p-tau, and hippocampal volume, with only p-tau contributing significantly (p = 0.002). Increased p-tau was associated with diminished excitatory activity of this EC (Figure 1). The EC from PPA to PCU was best explained Aβ42/40, p-tau, and their interaction, with p-tau (p = 0.0005) and the interaction (p = 0.003) being significant. Specifically, the interdependent progression of Aβ42/40 and p-tau was associated with less inhibitory activity (Figure 2).

·Figure 1 Estimated ATN pathology effects on model-based bottom-up connectivity from PPA to HC.

·Figure 2 Amyloid and tau effects on the connectivity from PPA to PCU.
Conclusions:
Disruptions of EC within the memory-encoding network were associated to AD pathology in a region-specific manner. The bottom-up connectivity from PPA to HC and PPA to PCU showed key synaptic alterations linking molecular pathology to memory impairment. EC differences within the MTL (PPA to HC) were primarily associated with tau pathology, whereas MTL to parietal connectivity reflected both p-tau and interactions with amyloid. These findings underscore the nuanced and region-specific effects of molecular pathology on synaptic connectivity captured by the techniques.
Disorders of the Nervous System:
Neurodegenerative/ Late Life (eg. Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s)
Modeling and Analysis Methods:
Connectivity (eg. functional, effective, structural)
fMRI Connectivity and Network Modeling 1
Multivariate Approaches 2
Keywords:
Degenerative Disease
FUNCTIONAL MRI
Memory
Modeling
Multivariate
1|2Indicates the priority used for review
By submitting your proposal, you grant permission for the Organization for Human Brain Mapping (OHBM) to distribute your work in any format, including video, audio print and electronic text through OHBM OnDemand, social media channels, the OHBM website, or other electronic publications and media.
I accept
The Open Science Special Interest Group (OSSIG) is introducing a reproducibility challenge for OHBM 2025. This new initiative aims to enhance the reproducibility of scientific results and foster collaborations between labs. Teams will consist of a “source” party and a “reproducing” party, and will be evaluated on the success of their replication, the openness of the source work, and additional deliverables. Click here for more information.
Propose your OHBM abstract(s) as source work for future OHBM meetings by selecting one of the following options:
I do not want to participate in the reproducibility challenge.
Please indicate below if your study was a "resting state" or "task-activation” study.
Task-activation
Healthy subjects only or patients (note that patient studies may also involve healthy subjects):
Patients
Was this research conducted in the United States?
No
Were any human subjects research approved by the relevant Institutional Review Board or ethics panel?
NOTE: Any human subjects studies without IRB approval will be automatically rejected.
Yes
Were any animal research approved by the relevant IACUC or other animal research panel?
NOTE: Any animal studies without IACUC approval will be automatically rejected.
Not applicable
Please indicate which methods were used in your research:
Functional MRI
Computational modeling
For human MRI, what field strength scanner do you use?
3.0T
Which processing packages did you use for your study?
SPM
Provide references using APA citation style.
Hurvich, C. M., & Tsai, C.-L. (1989). Regression and time series model selection in small samples. Biometrika, 76(2), 297–307. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/76.2.297
Jack, C. R., Bennett, D. A., Blennow, K., Carrillo, M. C., Dunn, B., Haeberlein, S. B., Holtzman, D. M., Jagust, W., Jessen, F., Karlawish, J., Liu, E., Molinuevo, J. L., Montine, T., Phelps, C., Rankin, K. P., Rowe, C. C., Scheltens, P., Siemers, E., Snyder, H. M., … Silverberg, N. (2018). NIA-AA Research Framework: Toward a biological definition of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s & Dementia : The Journal of the Alzheimer’s Association, 14(4), 535–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2018.02.018
Schott, B. H., Soch, J., Kizilirmak, J. M., Schütze, H., Assmann, A., Maass, A., Ziegler, G., Sauvage, M., & Richter, A. (2023). Inhibitory temporo-parietal effective connectivity is associated with explicit memory performance in older adults. iScience, 26(10), 107765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.107765
Servén, D., Brummitt, C., Abedi, H., & Hlink. (2018). dswah/pyGAM: V0.8.0 (Version v0.8.0) [Computer software]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.1476122
Tzioras, M., McGeachan, R. I., Durrant, C. S., & Spires-Jones, T. L. (2023). Synaptic degeneration in Alzheimer disease. Nature Reviews Neurology, 19(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41582-022-00749-z
Zeidman, P., Jafarian, A., Corbin, N., Seghier, M. L., Razi, A., Price, C. J., & Friston, K. J. (2019). A guide to group effective connectivity analysis, part 1: First level analysis with DCM for fMRI. NeuroImage, 200, 174–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.06.031
No