APOE*E4 Is Associated with Gray Matter Loss in the Posterior Cingulate Cortex in Healthy Elderly Controls Subsequently Developing Subtle Cognitive Decline ========================================================================================================================================================== * S. Haller * M.-L. Montandon * C. Rodriguez * M. Ackermann * F.R. Herrmann * P. Giannakopoulos ## Abstract **BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:** The presence of *apolipoprotein E4* (*APOE***E4*) is the strongest currently known genetic risk factor for Alzheimer disease and is associated with brain gray matter loss, notably in areas involved in Alzheimer disease pathology. Our objective was to assess the effect of *APOE***E4* on brain structures in healthy elderly controls who subsequently developed subtle cognitive decline. **MATERIALS AND METHODS:** This prospective study included 382 community-dwelling elderly controls. At baseline, participants underwent MR imaging at 3T, extensive neuropsychological testing, and genotyping. After neuropsychological follow-up at 18 months, participants were classified into cognitively stable controls and cognitively deteriorating controls. Data analysis included whole-brain voxel-based morphometry and ROI analysis of GM. **RESULTS:** *APOE***E4*-related GM loss at baseline was found only in the cognitively deteriorating controls in the posterior cingulate cortex. There was no *APOE***E4-*related effect in the hippocampus, mesial temporal lobe, or brain areas not involved in Alzheimer disease pathology. Controls in the cognitively deteriorating group had slightly lower GM concentration in the hippocampus at baseline. Higher GM densities in the hippocampus, middle temporal lobe, and amygdala were associated with a decreased risk for cognitively deteriorating group status at follow-up. **CONCLUSIONS:** *APOE***E4*-related GM loss in the posterior cingulate cortex (an area involved in Alzheimer disease pathology) was found only in those elderly controls who subsequently developed subtle cognitive decline but not in cognitively stable controls. This finding might explain the partially conflicting results of previous studies that typically did not include detailed neuropsychological assessment and follow-up. Most important, *APOE***E4* status had no impact on GM density in areas affected early by neurofibrillary tangle formation such as the hippocampus and mesial temporal lobe. ## ABBREVIATIONS: AD : Alzheimer disease *APOE* : *apolipoprotein E* dCON : cognitively deteriorating controls MCI : mild cognitive impairment sCON : cognitively stable controls The *apolipoprotein E* gene (*APOE*) has 3 different alleles, *APOE***E2*, *APOE***E3*, and *APOE***E4*. The presence of *APOE***E4* is the strongest currently known genetic risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD).1,2 *APOE***E3* is the most common variant in the general population, while the *APOE***E2* variant is associated with a lower risk of AD. The *APOE* variant modifies not only the risk of AD but also the age of onset of cognitive symptoms.3,4 Cross-sectional structural MR imaging studies indicated reduced gray matter in elderly *APOE***E4* carriers including healthy controls, subjective memory impairment, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and AD.5⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–14 In MCI and AD, the *APOE***E4*-related GM decrease seems to affect areas involved in AD pathology, notably the hippocampus, amygdala, and mesial temporal cortex14⇓⇓–17 but also the left occipital, frontal, and anterior cingulate cortices.14,18 In healthy elderly controls, the *APOE***E4* effect on brain structure is less clear. Decreased GM volume in the caudate nuclei14 and the right cingulate gyrus and decreased white matter integrity in right parahippocampal gyrus19 were found. However, negative data were also reported.15,18,20 In younger *APOE***E4* carriers, the results are also more ambiguous. Some studies demonstrated reduced GM in middle-aged21 and young *APOE***E4* carriers22,23 compared with the other *APOE* allele carriers, whereas others reported no *APOE***E4* effect throughout adulthood.20 Longitudinal studies also indicated that among MCI converters, those with a positive *APOE***E4* status displayed increased GM atrophy in AD-related brain regions.24,25 The current investigation goes 1 step earlier in the degenerative process and assesses the effect of *APOE* allele status in healthy controls who subsequently developed subtle cognitive decline. To this end, we performed MR imaging and cognitive assessment at baseline in 382 community-dwelling elderly controls. Extensive cognitive assessment was repeated at 18-month follow-up to define a subsample of 181 individuals with a stable condition and 201 with a deteriorating condition. We demonstrated a gradually progressive GM loss in the posterior cingulate cortex as a function of *APOE* alleles (*E2* < *E3* < *E4*) only in deteriorating groups, with preserved GM densities in cognitively stable groups. ## Materials and Methods ### Study Protocol and Participants All data used in the preparation of this article were obtained from a large, population-based study of community-dwelling older adults who have undergone an 18-month follow-up. These community-dwelling subjects were recruited via advertisements in local newspapers and media. All participants had normal or corrected-to-normal visual acuity, and none reported a history of neurologic or psychiatric disorders or alcohol or drug abuse. To avoid contamination by reversible forms of cognitive decline, subjects with vitamin B12 or folic acid deficiency and those with infectious diseases were excluded. Subjects with regular use of neuroleptics, antidepressants, mood stabilizers, anticonvulsant drugs, or psychostimulants and those with contraindications to MR imaging were excluded. Initially, 433 patients were screened. Thirty-seven refused to continue after the first evaluation (no death or illness, but for personal reasons). Fourteen were not considered due to the above-mentioned exclusion criteria. Five among them had substantial abnormal findings on MR imaging at baseline. The education level was defined according to the Swiss scholar system, in which level 1 = <9 years (primary school), level 2 = between 9 and 12 years (high school), and level 3 = >12 years (university). All participants provided written informed consent after formal approval by the local ethics committee. ### Neuropsychological Assessment At baseline, all individuals were evaluated with an extensive neuropsychological battery, including the Mini-Mental State Examination,26 the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale,27 and the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living.28 Cognitive assessment included the following: 1) attention (Digit-Symbol-Coding,29 Trail-Making Test A,30); 2) working memory (verbal: Digit Span Forward31; visuospatial: visual memory span [Corsi]32); 3) episodic memory (verbal: RI-48 Cued Recall Test33; visual: Shapes Test34); 4) executive functions (Trail-Making Test B,30 Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, and Phonemic Verbal Fluency Test); 5) language (Boston Naming Test35); 6) visual gnosis (Ghent Overlapping Figures); and 7) apraxia: ideomotor,36 reflexive,37 and constructional (Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer Disease; figure copy test38). All individuals were also evaluated with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale.39 Those who met dementia the *Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders*, 4th edition, diagnostic criteria based on the neuropsychological and clinical assessments were excluded. In agreement with the criteria of Petersen et al,40 participants with a Clinical Dementia Rating scale score of 0.5 but no dementia and a score of >1.5 SDs below the age-appropriate mean in any of the previously mentioned tests were also excluded from the present study. Participants with neither dementia nor MCI were classified as cognitively healthy older controls and underwent full neuropsychological assessment at follow-up by the same neuropsychologist, on average 18 months later. Those whose cognitive scores remained stable and those whose performance at follow-up was at least 0.5 SD lower compared with the baseline evaluation in at least 2 cognitive tests were classified as stable (sCON) and deteriorating (dCON), respectively. Two neuropsychologists clinically assessed all individuals independently. The final classification of sCON versus dCON was made by a trained neuropsychologist who took into account both the neuropsychological test results and overall clinical assessment.41 In her final appreciation, the trained neuropsychologist considered the most relevant test performances, usually altered in the course of Alzheimer disease (verbal episodic memory: RI-48 Cued Recall Test; attention: Trail-Making Test A; executive functions: Trail-Making Test B30 and Phonemic Verbal Fluency Test). Among the 2 tests needed for dCON classification, altered cognitive scores in at least 1 of these tests were mandatory. ### MR Imaging Acquisition Imaging data were acquired on a clinical routine whole-body 3T MR scanner (Tim Trio; Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). The structural 3D T1 sequence was performed with the following fundamental parameters: 256 × 256 matrix; 176 sections; 1 × 1 × 1 mm3; TE, 2.3 ms; TR, 2300 ms. Additional sequences (T2WI, susceptibility-weighted imaging, diffusion tensor imaging) were used to exclude incidental brain lesions. ### Genetic Testing Whole-blood samples were collected at baseline for all subjects for *APOE* genotyping. Standard DNA extraction was performed by using either 9-mL ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid tubes (Sarstedt AG, Nümbrecht, Germany) or the Oragene Saliva DNA Kit (DNA Genotek; Kanata, Ontario, Canada); tubes were stored at −20°C. *APOE* genotyping was performed on the LightCycler (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland) as described previously.42 ### Statistical Analysis The voxel-based morphometry analysis was performed by using the FSL software package ([http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/](http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/)), according to the standard procedure. The essential processing steps included brain extraction with the FSL Brain Extraction Tool ([http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/BET](http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/BET)), tissue-type segmentation with the FMRIB Automated Segmentation Tool ([http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/fast](http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/fast)), nonlinear transformation into Montreal Neurological Institute reference space, and creation of a study-specific GM template to which the native GM images were then nonlinearly reregistered. The modulated segmented images were then smoothed with an isotropic Gaussian kernel with a σ of 2 mm. Finally, the voxelwise FSL General Linear Model ([http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/GLM](http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/GLM)) was applied by using permutation-based nonparametric testing with the FSL Randomize tool ([http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/Randomise/](http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/Randomise/)) with threshold-free cluster enhancement correction for multiple comparisons,43 considering fully corrected *P* values < .05 as significant. The analysis was performed to compare regions and *APOE* genotypes with the percentage of GM as a dependent variable with age, sex, and education as potential confounders. Furthermore, we created a mask for the bilateral mesial temporal cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, amygdala, caudate nuclei, and parietal and occipital lobes that was then applied to the GM image of the study-specific template. Demographic and neuropsychological data were compared among groups by using regression models with group (stable versus deteriorating), *APOE* genotype (3/2, 3/3, 4/3), and a group × genotype interaction term as predictors. Logistic, ordered logistic, and linear regression models were used for binary, ordinal, and respectively continuous variables. Group effects (stable versus deteriorating) were compared by using the *Z*-test for plain and ordered logistic regressions and the *t* test for linear regression. Logistic regression models were built to assess the relationship between cognitive status (dependent variable) and *APOE* genotyping, GM densities in the 3 areas of interest (posterior cingulate, hippocampus, mesial temporal lobe), age, sex, and education levels (independent variables). Because GM density values were all ranging between 0.32 and 0.87, we transformed them by using *z* scores (subtracting the overall mean and dividing by the overall SD) and thus calculated the standardized odds ratio, which represents the decrease in estimated risk for a 1-SD change in GM density. ## Results ### Demographic and Neuropsychological Data The final sample included 382 subjects with 3D T1 scans available and *APOE* genotyping. We grouped these subjects into 3 groups: 43 with *APOE***E2* (mean age, 74.1 ± 3.8 years; 22 with sCON and 21 with dCON), 274 with *APOE***E3* (mean age, 74.1 ± 4.1 years; 132 with sCON and 142 with dCON), and 65 with *APOE***E4* (mean age, 73.6 ± 4.1 years; 27 with sCON and 38 with dCON) genotypes. Demographic data and neuropsychological performances at baseline did not differ between sCON and dCON groups (data not shown). As expected, there were group differences at follow-up, with worse cognitive performances of dCON for the Trail-Making Test B (*P* = .015), Verbal Fluency (*P* = .045), and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (number of categories) (*P* = .034). The *APOE***E4* allele had a negative impact on verbal fluency performance at follow-up (*P* = .011) with a significant group × *APOE* interaction (*P* = .003 for dCON). There was no other significant association between *APOE* genotyping and neuropsychological performances at follow-up (Table 1 and On-line Table). View this table: [Table 1:](http://www.ajnr.org/content/38/7/1335/T1) Table 1: Essential demographic data of the included study groups of stable and deteriorating elderly control participantsa ### Whole-Brain Voxel-Based Morphometry In a first step, we performed a voxelwise analysis across the entire brain. The posterior cingulate cortex demonstrated a significant difference between *APOE***E3* > *APOE***E4* for the dCON group (Fig 1). ![Fig 1.](http://www.ajnr.org/https://ajnr-sso.highwirestaging.com/content/ajnr/38/7/1335/F1.medium.gif) [Fig 1.](http://www.ajnr.org/content/38/7/1335/F1) Fig 1. Whole-brain voxel-based morphometry analysis demonstrating higher GM density for the comparison of *APOE***E3* > *APOE***E4* in the posterior cingulate cortex. *P* < .05 corrected. ### ROI Analysis: *APOE* Effect on GM Densities in dCON and sCON In a second step, we additionally performed an ROI analysis in 7 regions of particular interest in the context of cognitive decline (posterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, mesial temporal lobe, parietal lobe, amygdala, and caudate nucleus) with the occipital lobe as a control region. In the posterior cingulate, the GM concentration decreased from *E2* to *E3* to *E4* across all participants. When we separated the patients into stable-versus-deteriorating controls, this decrease in GM concentration was present in only the dCON group (Fig 2*A* and Table 2). Moreover, we found a significant difference between sCON versus dCON in *APOE***E4*-positive individuals. Concerning the hippocampus, patients with dCON had lower GM concentrations compared with those with sCON, which was significant only in the *APOE***E3* group, presumably due to the large sample size (Fig 2*B* and Table 3). In the amygdala, there was a decrease in GM concentration from *APOE***E2* to *APOE***E3* to *APOE***E4* in all participants, and this effect was present only in the sCON but not in the dCON subgroups (Fig 2*C* and Table 3). In the parietal lobe, the pattern was inverse, with increased GM concentration in those with dCON, notably in those with *APOE***E3* and *APOE***E4* (Fig 2*D* and Table 3). No significant differences were found in the mesial temporal lobe, occipital lobe, or caudate nuclei (Fig 2*E–G* and Table 3). ![](http://www.ajnr.org/https://ajnr-sso.highwirestaging.com/content/ajnr/38/7/1335/F2/graphic-2.medium.gif) [](http://www.ajnr.org/content/38/7/1335/F2/graphic-2) ![](http://www.ajnr.org/https://ajnr-sso.highwirestaging.com/content/ajnr/38/7/1335/F2/graphic-3.medium.gif) [](http://www.ajnr.org/content/38/7/1335/F2/graphic-3) Fig 2. ROI analysis of GM density depending on *APOE* status for the 7 target regions for all elderly controls (left-hand side) and separately for subjects with sCON and dCON (right-hand side). One *asterisk* indicates *P* < .05; 2 *asterisks*, *P* < .01; 3 *asterisks*, *P* < .001; 4 *asterisks*, *P* < .0001. View this table: [Table 2:](http://www.ajnr.org/content/38/7/1335/T2) Table 2: ROI analysis of GM concentration in the 7 regions for the comparison of sCON versus dCONa View this table: [Table 3:](http://www.ajnr.org/content/38/7/1335/T3) Table 3: ROI analysis of GM concentration in the 7 regions for the comparison of *APOE***E2* versus *APOE***E3* and *APOE***E2* versus *APOE***E4* and *APOE***E3* versus *APOE***E4* ### Logistic Regression Models Higher GM densities in the hippocampus, middle temporal lobe, and amygdala were all associated with a decreased risk for dCON status at follow-up (hippocampus: standardized OR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61–0.92; *P* = .006; middle temporal lobe: standardized OR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.65–0.98; *P* = .028; and amygdale: standardized OR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61–0.93, *P* = .008). Although significant, these associations explained <1.5% of cognitive variability. *APOE* genotyping, age, sex, and duration did not predict dCON status at follow-up. When categorizing GM densities into quintiles, we confirmed the assumption of a linearity of their association with the log odds, because the odds ratios displayed a gradient that is statistically significant for quintile 4 (threshold ≥ 0.4426118) and quintile 5 (threshold ≥ 0.48496512), with ORs of 0.51 (*P* = .044) and 0.44 (*P* = .013). ## Discussion Several studies demonstrated that the presence of the *APOE***E4* allele modulates the expression of brain atrophy in MCI and clinically overt AD, increasing the vulnerability of the areas prone to early neurodegeneration such as the hippocampus, amygdala, and mesial temporal lobe.15⇓–17 Although higher cortical amyloid β load and decreased metabolism in the above-mentioned areas were reported in the *APOE***E4* allele, cross-sectional MR imaging studies failed to identify consistent GM decreases associated with this genotype in elderly controls (for a review see Fouquet et al44). The finding in the current investigation that *APOE***E4* was related to GM loss in only the subsequently deteriorating but not in the cognitively stable groups might explain these partially conflicting results of previous studies, which typically do not include detailed neuropsychological assessment and follow-up. The present data show that the *APOE***E4* genotype is not associated with an increased risk of dCON status at follow-up. Consistent with previous reports in elderly controls,15,18,20 no *APOE* genotyping–related effect was identified in the hippocampus and mesial temporal cortex in subjects with both sCON and dCON. In agreement with previous observations in this field, these observations indicate that the *APOE***E4* allele detrimental effect in terms of structural changes and clinical progression becomes evident only in elderly individuals with significant cognitive deterioration (MCI) or clinically overt symptoms of dementia (early AD).14⇓⇓–17 The posterior cingulate cortex is known to be affected early in the AD process with significant hypometabolism in cognitively healthy individuals and those with MCI (both converters and nonconverters; for review see Teipel and Grothe45). In more advanced stages of the degenerative process, this area exhibits subtle atrophy and hypometabolism in subjects with amnestic amyloid-negative AD.46 Rare cross-sectional studies addressed the impact of *APOE* genotyping on the structural and functional integrity of the posterior cingulate cortex. Early contributions from the Cardiovascular Health Study indicated an *APOE***E4*-independent age-related atrophy in the hippocampus and posterior cingulate cortex in healthy elderly controls.47 More recently, an altered energy metabolism was reported in this area in young adult *APOE***E4* carriers.48 In the same line, Lu et al49 reported cortical atrophy in the right cingulate gyrus in cognitively intact *APOE***E4* carriers. Our observations parallel these findings, suggesting that the presence of this allele may have a detrimental effect on GM density in this vulnerable area. The strengths of the present study include its longitudinal design, large number of community-dwelling subjects, and detailed neuropsychological testing at inclusion and follow-up. However, some limitations should also be considered. First, in line with recent core clinical criteria for MCI,50 the identification of deteriorating controls was based on the objective decline in cognitive functions measured by using serial, comprehensive neuropsychological assessments. However, in the absence of longer follow-up and AD biomarker characterization at baseline (including PET amyloid scans or the CSF τ/amyloid β42 ratio), the cognitive fate of these individuals remains uncertain so that they cannot be a priori considered as subjects with incipient AD. Second, the rarity of *APOE***E4* homozygotes precluded a detailed analysis of gene-dose effect on GM densities. Third, handedness was not considered as a covariate in our MR imaging analysis, which included both left- and right-handed controls. ## Conclusions Our data reveal that the presence of the *APOE***E4* allele is associated with decreased GM density in the posterior cingulate cortex in dCON, a community-based group of elderly controls who subsequently had subtle cognitive decline at 18-month follow-up. This *APOE* effect was not identified in cognitively stable controls. Most important, the *APOE***E4* allele has no impact on GM density in areas affected early by neurofibrillary tangle formation such as the hippocampus and mesial temporal lobe. These observations suggest that decreased GM density in the posterior cingulate cortex should be systematically detected among *APOE***E4* controls because it could represent a structural marker preceding subtle cognitive deficits in the very early stages of the degenerative process. ## Footnotes * Disclosures: Sven Haller—*RELATED*: *Grant*: Swiss National Foundation, *Comments*: grant SNF 3200B0–1161193 and SPUM 33CM30–124111* and an unrestricted grant from the Assocation Suisse pour la Recherche Alzheimer*. *Money paid to the institution. * This work is supported by Swiss National Foundation grants SNF 3200B0-1161193 and SPUM 33CM30-124111 and an unrestricted grant from the Assocation Suisse pour la Recherche Alzheimer. Indicates open access to non-subscribers at [www.ajnr.org](http://www.ajnr.org) ## References 1. 1. Corder EH, Saunders AM, Strittmatter WJ, et al. Gene dose of apolipoprotein E type 4 allele and the risk of Alzheimer's disease in late onset families. Science 1993;261:921–23 doi:10.1126/science.8346443 pmid:8346443 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Mzoic2NpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEyOiIyNjEvNTEyMy85MjEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMDoiL2FqbnIvMzgvNy8xMzM1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 2. 2. Strittmatter WJ, Saunders AM, Schmechel D, et al. Apolipoprotein E: high-avidity binding to beta-amyloid and increased frequency of type 4 allele in late-onset familial Alzheimer disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1993;90:1977–81 doi:10.1073/pnas.90.5.1977 pmid:8446617 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiI5MC81LzE5NzciO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMDoiL2FqbnIvMzgvNy8xMzM1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 3. 3. Jack CR Jr., Therneau TM, Wiste HJ, et al. Transition rates between amyloid and neurodegeneration biomarker states and to dementia: a population-based, longitudinal cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2016;15:56–64 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00323-3 pmid:26597325 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00323-3&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26597325&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 4. 4. Jack CR Jr., Wiste HJ, Weigand SD, et al. Age-specific population frequencies of cerebral β-amyloidosis and neurodegeneration among people with normal cognitive function aged 50–89 years: a cross-sectional study. Lancet Neurol 2014;13:997–1005 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70194-2 pmid:25201514 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70194-2&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25201514&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000341959700015&link_type=ISI) 5. 5. Lee YM, Ha JK, Park JM, et al. Impact of apolipoprotein E4 polymorphism on the gray matter volume and the white matter integrity in subjective memory impairment without white matter hyperintensities: voxel-based morphometry and Tract-Based Spatial Statistics Study under 3-Tesla MRI. J Neuroimaging 2016;26:144–49 doi:10.1111/jon.12207 pmid:25678236 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/jon.12207&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25678236&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 6. 6. Li B, Shi J, Gutman BA, et al. Influence of APOE genotype on hippocampal atrophy over time: an N=1925 surface-based ADNI study. PLoS One 2016;11:e0152901 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152901 pmid:27065111 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0152901&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27065111&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 7. 7. Shi J, Leporé N, Gutman BA, et al. Genetic influence of apolipoprotein E4 genotype on hippocampal morphometry: an N = 725 surface-based Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative study. Hum Brain Mapp 2014;35:-3903–18 doi:10.1002/hbm.22447 pmid:24453132 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/hbm.22447&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24453132&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 8. 8. Goñi J, Cervantes S, Arrondo G, et al. Selective brain gray matter atrophy associated with APOE ε4 and MAPT H1 in subjects with mild cognitive impairment. J Alzheimers Dis 2013;33:1009–19 doi:10.3233/JAD-2012-121174 pmid:23064258 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3233/JAD-2012-121174&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23064258&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 9. 9. Lu PH, Thompson PM, Leow A, et al. Apolipoprotein E genotype is associated with temporal and hippocampal atrophy rates in healthy elderly adults: a tensor-based morphometry study. J Alzheimers Dis 2011;23:433–42 doi:10.3233/JAD-2010-101398 pmid:21098974 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3233/JAD-2010-101398&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21098974&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 10. 10. Honea RA, Vidoni E, Harsha A, et al. Impact of APOE on the healthy aging brain: a voxel-based MRI and DTI study. J Alzheimers Dis 2009;18:553–64 pmid:19584447 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3233/JAD-2009-1163&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19584447&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000272860100008&link_type=ISI) 11. 11. Agosta F, Vossel KA, Miller BL, et al. Apolipoprotein E epsilon4 is associated with disease-specific effects on brain atrophy in Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009;106:2018–22 pmid:1916476122 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMDoiMTA2LzYvMjAxOCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjIwOiIvYWpuci8zOC83LzEzMzUuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 12. 12. Wishart HA, Saykin AJ, McAllister TW, et al. Regional brain atrophy in cognitively intact adults with a single APOE epsilon4 allele. Neurology 2006;67:1221–24 doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000238079.00472.3a pmid:17030756 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6OToibmV1cm9sb2d5IjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjY3LzcvMTIyMSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjIwOiIvYWpuci8zOC83LzEzMzUuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 13. 13. Pennanen C, Testa C, Boccardi M, et al. The effect of apolipoprotein polymorphism on brain in mild cognitive impairment: a voxel-based morphometric study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2006;22:60–66 doi:10.1159/000093263 pmid:16682795 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1159/000093263&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16682795&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 14. 14. Liu Y, Paajanen T, Westman E, et al. Effect of APOE ε4 allele on cortical thicknesses and volumes: the AddNeuroMed study. J Alzheimers Dis 2010;21:947–66 doi:10.3233/JAD-2010-100201 pmid:20693633 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3233/JAD-2010-100201&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20693633&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000281903600024&link_type=ISI) 15. 15. Lupton MK, Strike L, Hansell NK, et al. The effect of increased genetic risk for Alzheimer's disease on hippocampal and amygdala volume. Neurobiol Aging 2016;40:68–77 doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2015.12.023 pmid:26973105 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2015.12.023&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26973105&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 16. 16. Wang X, Wang J, He Y, et al. Apolipoprotein E ε4 modulates cognitive profiles, hippocampal volume, and resting-state functional connectivity in Alzheimer's disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2015;45:781–95 doi:10.3233/JAD-142556 pmid:25624419 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3233/JAD-142556&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25624419&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 17. 17. Susanto TA, Pua EP, Zhou J, et al. Cognition, brain atrophy, and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers changes from preclinical to dementia stage of Alzheimer's disease and the influence of apolipoprotein e. J Alzheimers Dis 2015;45:-253–68 doi:10.3233/JAD-142451 pmid:2552495 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3233/JAD-142451&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25524955&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 18. 18. Chen J, Shu H, Wang Z, et al. The interaction of APOE genotype by age in amnestic mild cognitive impairment: a voxel-based morphometric study. J Alzheimers Dis 2015;43:657–68 doi:10.3233/JAD-141677 pmid:25114090 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3233/JAD-141677&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25114090&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 19. 19. Chen Y, Chen K, Zhang J, et al. Disrupted functional and structural networks in cognitively normal elderly subjects with the APOE ε4 allele. Neuropsychopharmacology 2015;40:1181–91 doi:10.1038/npp.2014.302 pmid:25403724 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/npp.2014.302&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25403724&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 20. 20. Habes M, Toledo JB, Resnick SM, et al. Relationship between APOE genotype and structural MRI measures throughout adulthood in the study of health in Pomerania population-based cohort. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:1636–42 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4805 pmid:27173368 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiYWpuciI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIzNy85LzE2MzYiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMDoiL2FqbnIvMzgvNy8xMzM1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 21. 21. Matura S, Prvulovic D, Jurcoane A, et al. Differential effects of the ApoE4 genotype on brain structure and function. Neuroimage 2014;89:81–91 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.042 pmid:24296331 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.042&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24296331&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 22. 22. Shaw P, Lerch JP, Pruessner JC, et al. Cortical morphology in children and adolescents with different apolipoprotein E gene polymorphisms: an observational study. Lancet Neurol 2007;6:494–500 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(07)70106-0 pmid:17509484 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(07)70106-0&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17509484&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000247044900014&link_type=ISI) 23. 23. O'Dwyer L, Lamberton F, Matura S, et al. Reduced hippocampal volume in healthy young ApoE4 carriers: an MRI study. PLoS One 2012;7:e48895 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0048895 pmid:23152815 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0048895&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23152815&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 24. 24. Hämäläinen A, Grau-Olivares M, Tervo S, et al. Apolipoprotein E epsilon 4 allele is associated with increased atrophy in progressive mild cognitive impairment: a voxel-based morphometric study. Neurodegener Dis 2008;5:186–89 doi:10.1159/000113698 pmid:18322386 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1159/000113698&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18322386&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 25. 25. Risacher SL, Shen L, West JD, et al; Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Longitudinal MRI atrophy biomarkers: relationship to conversion in the ADNI cohort. Neurobiol Aging 2010;31:1401–18 doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.04.029 pmid:20620664 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.04.029&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20620664&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000279991800013&link_type=ISI) 26. 26. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12:189–98 doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 pmid:1202204 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=1202204&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1975AY27900005&link_type=ISI) 27. 27. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361–70 doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x pmid:6880820 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=6880820&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1983QV25600001&link_type=ISI) 28. 28. Barberger-Gateau P, Commenges D, Gagnon M, et al. Instrumental activities of daily living as a screening tool for cognitive impairment and dementia in elderly community dwellers. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992;40:1129–34 doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1992.tb01802.x pmid:1401698 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1532-5415.1992.tb01802.x&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=1401698&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1992JW73800008&link_type=ISI) 29. 29. Wechsler DA. Wechsler Memory Scale. 3rd ed. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation; 1987 30. 30. Reitan RM. Validity of the Trail Making Test as an indicator of organic brain damage. Percept Mot Skills 1958;8:271–76 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2466/pms.1958.8.3.271&link_type=DOI) 31. 31. Wechsler D. Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. New York: Psychological Corporation; 1995 32. 32. Milner B. Interhemispheric differences in the localization of psychological processes in man. Br Med Bull 1971;27:272–77 doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.bmb.a070866 pmid:4937273 [FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo2OiJibWJ1bGwiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6ODoiMjcvMy8yNzIiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMDoiL2FqbnIvMzgvNy8xMzM1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 33. 33. Buschke H, Sliwinski MJ, Kuslansky G, et al. Diagnosis of early dementia by the Double Memory Test: encoding specificity improves diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. Neurology 1997;48:989–97 doi:10.1212/WNL.48.4.989 pmid:9109889 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6OToibmV1cm9sb2d5IjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjQ4LzQvOTg5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjA6Ii9ham5yLzM4LzcvMTMzNS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 34. 34. Baddley A, Emslie H, Nimmo-Smith I. Doors and People. A Test of Visual and Verbal Recall and Recognition. Bury St. Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Company; 1994 35. 35. Kaplan EF, Goodglass H, Weintraub S. The Boston Naming Test. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1983 36. 36. Schnider A, Hanlon RE, Alexander DN, et al. Ideomotor apraxia: behavioral dimensions and neuroanatomical basis. Brain Lang 1997;58:125–36 doi:10.1006/brln.1997.1770 pmid:9184099 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1006/brln.1997.1770&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9184099&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1997XA63000008&link_type=ISI) 37. 37.1. Roy EA Poeck K. Clues to the nature of disruption to limb Praxis. In: Roy EA, ed. Neuropsychological Studies of Apraxia and related Disorders. Amsterdam: North-Holland; 1985:99–109 38. 38. Welsh KA, Butters N, Mohs RC, et al. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD), Part V: a normative study of the neuropsychological battery. Neurology 1994;44:609–14 doi:10.1212/WNL.44.4.609 pmid:8164812 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6OToibmV1cm9sb2d5IjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjQ0LzQvNjA5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjA6Ii9ham5yLzM4LzcvMTMzNS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 39. 39. Hughes CP, Berg L, Danziger WL, et al. A new clinical scale for the staging of dementia. Br J Psychiatry 1982;140:566–72 doi:10.1192/bjp.140.6.566 pmid:7104545 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTA6ImJqcHJjcHN5Y2giO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6OToiMTQwLzYvNTY2IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjA6Ii9ham5yLzM4LzcvMTMzNS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 40. 40. Petersen RC, Doody R, Kurz A, et al. Current concepts in mild cognitive impairment. Arch Neurol 2001;58:1985–92 doi:10.1001/archneur.58.12.1985 pmid:11735772 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/archneur.58.12.1985&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11735772&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000172713300003&link_type=ISI) 41. 41. Xekardaki A, Rodriguez C, Montandon ML, et al. Arterial spin labeling may contribute to the prediction of cognitive deterioration in healthy elderly individuals. Radiology 2015;274:490–99 doi:10.1148/radiol.14140680 pmid:25291458 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1148/radiol.14140680&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25291458&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 42. 42. Nauck M, Hoffmann MM, Wieland H, et al. Evaluation of the apo E genotyping kit on the LightCycler. Clin Chem 2000;46:722–24 pmid:10794760 [FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6ODoiY2xpbmNoZW0iO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6ODoiNDYvNS83MjIiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMDoiL2FqbnIvMzgvNy8xMzM1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 43. 43. Smith SM, Nichols TE. Threshold-free cluster enhancement: addressing problems of smoothing, threshold dependence and localisation in cluster inference. Neuroimage 2009;44:83–98 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.03.061 pmid:18501637 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.03.061&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18501637&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000262300900010&link_type=ISI) 44. 44. Fouquet M, Besson FL, Gonneaud J, et al. Imaging brain effects of APOE4 in cognitively normal individuals across the lifespan. Neuropsychol Rev 2014;24:290–99 doi:10.1007/s11065-014-9263-8 pmid:25146994 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s11065-014-9263-8&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25146994&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 45. 45. Teipel S, Grothe MJ; Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Does posterior cingulate hypometabolism result from disconnection or local pathology across preclinical and clinical stages of Alzheimer's disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016;43:526–36 doi:10.1007/s00259-015-3222-3 pmid:26555082 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s00259-015-3222-3&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26555082&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 46. 46. Chételat G, Ossenkoppele R, Villemagne VL, et al. Atrophy, hypometabolism and clinical trajectories in patients with amyloid-negative Alzheimer's disease. Brain 2016;139:2528–39 doi:10.1093/brain/aww159 pmid:27357349 [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NToiYnJhaW4iO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6MTA6IjEzOS85LzI1MjgiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMDoiL2FqbnIvMzgvNy8xMzM1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 47. 47. Raji CA, Lopez OL, Kuller LH, et al. White matter lesions and brain gray matter volume in cognitively normal elders. Neurobiol Aging 2012;33:-834.e7–16 doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2011.08.010 pmid:21943959 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2011.08.010&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21943959&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 48. 48. Perkins M, Wolf AB, Chavira B, et al. Altered energy metabolism pathways in the posterior cingulate in young adult apolipoprotein E ε4 carriers. J Alzheimers Dis 2016;53:95–106 doi:10.3233/JAD-151205 pmid:21943959 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.3233/JAD-151205&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21943959&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 49. 49. Lu H, Fung AW, Chan SS, et al. Disturbance of attention network functions in Chinese healthy older adults: an intra-individual perspective. Int Psychogeriatr 2016;28:291–301 doi:10.1017/S1041610215001556 pmid:26412555 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1017/S1041610215001556&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26412555&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) 50. 50. Albert MS, DeKosky ST, Dickson D, et al. The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement 2011;7:270–79 doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.008 pmid:21514249 [CrossRef](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.008&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21514249&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fajnr%2F38%2F7%2F1335.atom) [Web of Science](http://www.ajnr.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000291239600004&link_type=ISI) * Received September 25, 2016. * Accepted after revision February 17, 2017. * © 2017 by American Journal of Neuroradiology