Inter-network connectivity and amyloid-beta linked to cognitive decline in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease: a longitudinal cohort study

Table 1 Summary table of participant characteristics at baseline

Variable	CN (n = 28)	MCI^– (n = 27)	MCI⁺ (n = 36)	AD (n = 24)	p value
AV45 SUVR	1.16 (0.21)	1.01 (0.05)	1.39 (0.17)	1.50 (0.15)	< 0.001
Age (years)	74 (5.71)	71.36 (8.03)	72.58 (5.79)	74 (7.32)	0.42
Education (years)	16.43 (1.93)	16.48 (2.68)	15.86 (2.46)	15.46 (2.50)	0.36
Females	15 (54%)	12 (44%)	14 (39%)	12 (50%)	0.67
ICV (mm³)	1,572,034 (153,316.20)	1,545,103 (168,923.10)	1,568,839 (174,101.60)	1,574,218 (210,862)	0.94
APOE ε4	10 (36%)	4 (15%)	24 (66%)	20 (83%)	< 0.001^a
ADNI-Mem	0.89 (0.52)	0.37 (0.49)	0.15 (0.60)	−1.10 (0.56)	< 0.001
ADNI-EF	0.80 (0.56)	0.25 (0.80)	0.34 (0.86)	−0.94 (0.62)	< 0.001
CDR-SB	0.05 (0.16)	1.26 (0.92)	1.90 (1.06)	4.41 (1.31)	< 0.001
FC DMN-DAN	−0.12 (0.28)	0.00 (0.33)	−0.03 (0.24)	−0.15 (0.30)	0.17
FC DMN-SN	−0.15 (0.29)	−0.11 (0.28)	−0.08 (0.28)	−0.18 (0.27)	0.56
FC DMN-FPN	0.31 (0.23)	0.20 (0.30)	0.26 (0.23)	0.17 (0.29)	0.24
Follow-up time (years)	1.63 (1.24)	1.30 (0.96)	1.46 (1.09)	0.90 (0.53)	0.001

Data are presented as the mean (standard deviation) for the continuous variables and as n (%) for the categorical variable
The APOE ε4 row gives the number of participants in this group with one or more APOE ε4 alleles
Statistical significance was tested with analysis of variance for continuous variables and chi-squared test for the categorical variables
APOE ε4 apolipoprotein ε4, AD Alzheimer’s disease, ADNI-EF Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative executive functions score composite, ADNI-Mem Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative memory score composite, AV45 ¹⁸F-AV-45 florbetapir, CDR-SB Clinical Dementia Rating scale—sum of boxes, CN cognitively normal, DAN dorsal attention network, DMN default mode network, FC functional connectivity, FPN frontoparietal network, ICV intracranial volume, MCI mild cognitive impairment, SN salience network, SUVR standardized uptake value ratio
^a All groups were significantly different from each other, except CN versus MCI^– and MCI⁺ versus AD

ISSN: 1758-9193