FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2602965723> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2602965723 endingPage "1165" @default.
• W2602965723 startingPage "1158" @default.
• W2602965723 abstract "Neuronal compensation is widely assumed to account for the dissociation between brain pathology and (absence of) behavioural change during the prodromal and early stages of neurodegenerative conditions such as Huntington’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease (Barulli and Stern, 2013; Dennis and Cabeza, 2013; Scheller et al., 2014). Despite varying degrees of structural loss, patients demonstrate a level of performance during many tasks that is indistinguishable from their earlier performance, and is often similar to that of a normal population (Obeso et al., 2004; Malejko et al., 2014; Papoutsi et al., 2014; Kloppel and Gregory, 2015). Performance is maintained until pathological factors progress and performance levels begin to deteriorate. However, neuronal mechanisms that underlie such postulated compensation in neurodegeneration are poorly understood due to the complexity in defining what compensation actually is and how it can be measured.The characterization of compensation in neurodegeneration that we present here is derived from theoretical models of compensation in healthy ageing and Alzheimer’s disease (Lovden et al., 2010; Barulli and Stern, 2013; Reuter-Lorenz and Park, 2014). The complementary processes that may account for improved performance in the presence of structural degeneration include utilization of brain reserve and/or cognitive reserve, brain maintenance, and compensation (Barulli and Stern, 2013). Brain reserve describes the differences in brain size and structure that may support maintenance of function during ageing (or pathology). Cognitive reserve conversely is the preservation of functional efficiency and capacity despite neuronal degeneration until a critical point is reached. It is associated with lifestyle factors, including education and socio-economic status, which modulate the cognitive effects of ageing (Stern, 2006; Barulli and Stern, 2013). It is suggested that cognitive reserve comprises neuronal reserve, which accounts for the increased efficiency; and neural compensation where task-unrelated regions are recruited to perform a function (Stern, 2006). This is consistent with the concept of flexibility that, as a proxy for functional capacity and intelligence, describes the brain’s ability to optimize performance to cope with existing demands; these changes eventually leading to more permanent changes in the brain (Lovden et al., 2010).Compensation may also represent processes where activation within existing network regions increases. This is compatible with brain maintenance, whereby susceptibility to ageing (or pathology) can impact onset of cognitive decline, and other models of compensation, which promote the concept of augmented activation in existing networks (Barulli and Stern, 2013). The Scaffolding Theory of Aging and Cognition (STAC) in particular, proposes that both brain structure and function deteriorate with age, but that compensatory scaffolding counteracts adverse effects of neuronal and functional decline (Reuter-Lorenz and Park, 2014). This is congruent with changes that occur in neurodegenerative disease where structure degenerates, but performance is maintained due to compensatory changes in brain activity. Furthermore, STAC suggests that once deterioration becomes suitably severe, compensatory effects dissipate; just as functional compensation declines as neurodegenerative pathology progresses and structural degeneration becomes too severe.In characterizing compensation, we suppose that in a subset of prodromal patients with pathological loss of brain tissue there is reorganization within the brain that enables them to function at the same level as those without disease-related neuronal loss. As mentioned above, compensation may present as increased activation in a task-relevant brain region or recruitment of a brain region not typically associated with the function or network being tested. The latter is difficult to assess as there may be reasons for increased activity other than compensation. Furthermore, compensation may simply represent a situation whereby the rate of disease-related neuronal dysfunction is slowed over time, supporting the idea of preserved cognitive function. Here, we will focus on the notion that evidence of compensation in neurodegenerative disease is present when behaviour in patients is more similar to that of the normal population due to changes in brain activity and in the presence of structural degeneration (Barulli and Stern, 2013; Scheller et al., 2014).If compensation is defined as a lack of change in behaviour despite progressive brain pathology, then it is the absence or decreased severity of a behavioural deficit that needs to be measured as an outcome; this is challenging. In standard experimental paradigms, task-related changes in behaviour are used to explain changes in brain activity. Behavioural changes can be accounted for by concomitant changes in brain activity that ultimately differentiate the group(s) under investigation. When ‘absence’ of behavioural changes is the outcome variable, interpretation of alterations in brain activity is difficult (and sometimes impossible); we can only surmise that these changes may facilitate maintenance of normal performance. Furthermore, when investigating populations with neurodegenerative disease one might postulate an additional indeterminate effect of disease pathology on brain activity. Disease pathology may not only directly affect brain activity in terms of compensation, but may also exert subtle effects unrelated to maintenance of behaviour. Thus, it is important when attempting to operationalize compensation to try and account for pathological burden and be aware of its potential impact on the measurement of variables.A recent review identified three components necessary to characterize compensation in ageing: extent of pathology, behavioural performance, and a measure of brain activity, such as signals derived from functional MRI measurements (Dennis and Cabeza, 2013). ‘Successful compensation’ was identified as a positive relationship between task performance and functional MRI signals, modified by age-related neuronal alterations. This model could be extended to characterize compensation in neurodegeneration. However, it does not directly account for concomitant changes in pathology across individuals during the course of neurodegenerative disease. To quantify compensatory behaviour effectively in neurodegeneration, not only should the functional MRI signal as a marker of brain activation and network-relevant task performance be explored, but it should be examined across a spectrum of pathology. We hypothesize that compensation occurs in cases where increased brain activation is needed to maintain normal levels of behaviour in the presence of structural loss. Eventually pathology becomes too severe resulting in behaviour as well as brain activation decreasing with structure over time.An illustration of our hypothesized underlying model is shown in Fig. 1. The crucial components of compensation are a performance outcome (Y), an activation signal compensator (C) (e.g. functional MRI signal), and brain volume (X) (as a proxy for disease load). The horizontal axis represents time (or age of the participants), and the vertical axis represents scores on measures standardized to have equal means at the first observation. Curves indicate change over time for brain activity, performance, and brain volume. Three phases are depicted by the vertical dashed lines: Phase 1 spans (T0,T1), Phase 2 spans (T1,T2) and Phase 3 spans (T2,T3). In neurodegenerative disease, disease load is expected to steadily increase over time regardless of phase. Phase 1 is compensation, as brain activation (C) increases in reaction to brain deterioration (X), and performance (Y) is maintained. In Phase 2, disease effects start to overwhelm compensation, activation plateaus, and performance starts to deteriorate. Phase 3 shows relentless disease effects, brain activation decreases and there is acceleration in the deterioration rate of performance. The curves are idealized; there might be several stages where phasic change is monotonic rather than linear, and turns at the thresholds may be gradual rather than sharp. The important point to appreciate from Fig. 1 is that compensation leads to specific long-term patterns of change over time for three key variables. Open in a separate windowFigure 1Underlying compensation model showing change in key variables over time (activation, performance, brain volume). Measures are assumed to be standardized to have the same mean value at the first time point. Three phases are defined by the thresholds at T1 and T2 (dashed vertical lines). Phase 1 spans (T0, T1), Phase 2 spans (T1 to T2), and Phase 3 spans (T2 to T3). Phase 1 illustrates compensation in which brain volume decreases, activation increases, and performance is maintained. Phase 2 indicates that disease effects are beginning to overwhelm compensation, as activation flattens and performance begins to decrease. Phase 3 shows the complete swamping of compensation by disease effects with all three variables decreasing." @default.
• W2602965723 created "2017-04-07" @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5003674070 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5004911280 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5007022706 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5007738782 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5009152347 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5026091604 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5027293126 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5040078713 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5047270063 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5062884561 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5069266239 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5072900370 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5074881456 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5079461535 @default.
• W2602965723 creator A5089427262 @default.
• W2602965723 date "2017-02-23" @default.
• W2602965723 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2602965723 title "Operationalizing compensation over time in neurodegenerative disease" @default.
• W2602965723 cites W1179800764 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W1984090792 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2026063959 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2060023105 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2060523616 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2061426577 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2111221422 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2117971276 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2118546680 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2149807210 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2161117035 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2166593074 @default.
• W2602965723 cites W2171051269 @default.
• W2602965723 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awx022" @default.
• W2602965723 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/5382953" @default.
• W2602965723 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28334888" @default.
• W2602965723 hasPublicationYear "2017" @default.
• W2602965723 type Work @default.
• W2602965723 sameAs 2602965723 @default.
• W2602965723 citedByCount "53" @default.
• W2602965723 countsByYear W26029657232017 @default.
• W2602965723 countsByYear W26029657232018 @default.
• W2602965723 countsByYear W26029657232019 @default.
• W2602965723 countsByYear W26029657232020 @default.
• W2602965723 countsByYear W26029657232021 @default.
• W2602965723 countsByYear W26029657232022 @default.
• W2602965723 countsByYear W26029657232023 @default.
• W2602965723 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5003674070 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5004911280 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5007022706 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5007738782 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5009152347 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5026091604 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5027293126 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5040078713 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5047270063 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5062884561 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5069266239 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5072900370 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5074881456 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5079461535 @default.
• W2602965723 hasAuthorship W2602965723A5089427262 @default.
• W2602965723 hasBestOaLocation W26029657231 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C180747234 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C2779134260 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C2779734285 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C2780023022 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C9354725 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConcept C99508421 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C111472728 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C138885662 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C142724271 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C15744967 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C169760540 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C180747234 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C2779134260 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C2779734285 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C2780023022 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C71924100 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C77805123 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C9354725 @default.
• W2602965723 hasConceptScore W2602965723C99508421 @default.
• W2602965723 hasFunder F4320307874 @default.
• W2602965723 hasFunder F4320319990 @default.
• W2602965723 hasFunder F4320332161 @default.
• W2602965723 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2602965723 hasLocation W26029657231 @default.
• W2602965723 hasLocation W26029657232 @default.
• W2602965723 hasLocation W26029657233 @default.
• W2602965723 hasLocation W26029657234 @default.

• next