ArticleEuropean radiology2025
The Cortical Asymmetry Index for subtyping dementia patients.
Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interpretable AI for neural signal decoding in dementia: an EEG ensemble approach to differential diagnosis.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2026Article
- Cortical asymmetry in autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease progression.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Refining cognitive dispersion metrics for brain-behavior prediction in aging and mild cognitive impairment.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesFrontotemporal dementia (FTD) usually shows more asymmetric atrophy patterns than Alzheimer's disease (AD). We aim to quantify this asymmetry to differentiate FTD, AD, and FTD subtypes.
methodsWe studied T1-MRI scans, including FTD (different phenotypes), AD, and healthy controls (CTR). We defined the Cortical Asymmetry Index (CAI) using measures based on a metric derived from information theory with the cortical thickness measures. Some participants had additional follow-up MRIs, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), or plasma measures. We analysed differences at cross-sectional and longitudinal levels. We then clustered FTD and AD participants based on the CAI values and studied the patients' fluid biomarker characteristics within each cluster.
resultsA total of 101 FTD patients (64 ± 8 years, 53 men), 230 AD patients (65 ± 10 years, 84 men), and 173 CTR (59 ± 15 years, 67 men) were studied. CAI differentiated FTD, AD, and CTR. It also distinguished the semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA) from the other FTD phenotypes. In FTD, the CAI increased over time. The cluster analysis identified two subgroups within FTD, characterised by different neurofilament-light (NfL) levels, and two subgroups within AD, with different plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) levels. In AD, CAI correlated with GFAP and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE); in FTD, the CAI was associated with NfL levels.
conclusionsThe proposed method quantifies asymmetries previously described visually. The CAI could define clinically and biologically meaningful disease subgroups in the differential diagnosis of AD and FTD and its subtypes. CAI could also be of interest in tracking disease progression in FTD. KEY POINTS: Question There is a need to find quantitative metrics from MRI that can identify disease subgroups, and that could be useful for diagnosis and tracking. Findings We propose a Cortical Asymmetry Index that differentiates Alzheimer's disease (AD) from Frontotemporal dementia (FTD), distinguishes FTD subtypes, correlates with NFL and GFAP levels, and monitors FTD progression. Clinical relevance Our proposed index holds the potential to support clinical applications for diagnosis and disease tracking in AD and FTD, using a quantitative summary metric from MRI data. It also contributes to the understanding of these diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.