65 research outputs found

    Assessment of brain age in posttraumatic stress disorder: Findings from the ENIGMA PTSD and brain age working groups

    Get PDF
    Background: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is associated with markers of accelerated aging. Estimates of brain age, compared to chronological age, may clarify the effects of PTSD on the brain and may inform treatment approaches targeting the neurobiology of aging in the context of PTSD. Method: Adult subjects (N = 2229; 56.2% male) aged 18–69 years (mean = 35.6, SD = 11.0) from 21 ENIGMA-PGC PTSD sites underwent T1-weighted brain structural magnetic resonance imaging, and PTSD assessment (PTSD+, n = 884). Previously trained voxel-wise (brainageR) and region-of-interest (BARACUS and PHOTON) machine learning pipelines were compared in a subset of control subjects (n = 386). Linear mixed effects models were conducted in the full sample (those with and without PTSD) to examine the effect of PTSD on brain predicted age difference (brain PAD; brain age − chronological age) controlling for chronological age, sex, and scan site. Results: BrainageR most accurately predicted brain age in a subset (n = 386) of controls (brainageR: ICC = 0.71, R = 0.72, MAE = 5.68; PHOTON: ICC = 0.61, R = 0.62, MAE = 6.37; BARACUS: ICC = 0.47, R = 0.64, MAE = 8.80). Using brainageR, a three-way interaction revealed that young males with PTSD exhibited higher brain PAD relative to male controls in young and old age groups; old males with PTSD exhibited lower brain PAD compared to male controls of all ages. Discussion: Differential impact of PTSD on brain PAD in younger versus older males may indicate a critical window when PTSD impacts brain aging, followed by age-related brain changes that are consonant with individuals without PTSD. Future longitudinal research is warranted to understand how PTSD impacts brain aging across the lifespan

    Assessment of brain age in posttraumatic stress disorder: Findings from the ENIGMA PTSD and brain age working groups

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is associated with markers of accelerated aging. Estimates of brain age, compared to chronological age, may clarify the effects of PTSD on the brain and may inform treatment approaches targeting the neurobiology of aging in the context of PTSD. METHOD: Adult subjects (N = 2229; 56.2% male) aged 18-69 years (mean = 35.6, SD = 11.0) from 21 ENIGMA-PGC PTSD sites underwent T1-weighted brain structural magnetic resonance imaging, and PTSD assessment (PTSD+, n = 884). Previously trained voxel-wise (brainageR) and region-of-interest (BARACUS and PHOTON) machine learning pipelines were compared in a subset of control subjects (n = 386). Linear mixed effects models were conducted in the full sample (those with and without PTSD) to examine the effect of PTSD on brain predicted age difference (brain PAD; brain age - chronological age) controlling for chronological age, sex, and scan site. RESULTS: BrainageR most accurately predicted brain age in a subset (n = 386) of controls (brainageR: ICC = 0.71, R = 0.72, MAE = 5.68; PHOTON: ICC = 0.61, R = 0.62, MAE = 6.37; BARACUS: ICC = 0.47, R = 0.64, MAE = 8.80). Using brainageR, a three-way interaction revealed that young males with PTSD exhibited higher brain PAD relative to male controls in young and old age groups; old males with PTSD exhibited lower brain PAD compared to male controls of all ages. DISCUSSION: Differential impact of PTSD on brain PAD in younger versus older males may indicate a critical window when PTSD impacts brain aging, followed by age-related brain changes that are consonant with individuals without PTSD. Future longitudinal research is warranted to understand how PTSD impacts brain aging across the lifespan

    Assessment of Brain Age in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Findings from the ENIGMA PTSD and Brain Age Working Groups

    Get PDF
    Background Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is associated with markers of accelerated aging. Estimates of brain age, compared to chronological age, may clarify the effects of PTSD on the brain and may inform treatment approaches targeting the neurobiology of aging in the context of PTSD. Method Adult subjects (N = 2229; 56.2% male) aged 18–69 years (mean = 35.6, SD = 11.0) from 21 ENIGMA-PGC PTSD sites underwent T1-weighted brain structural magnetic resonance imaging, and PTSD assessment (PTSD+, n = 884). Previously trained voxel-wise (brainageR) and region-of-interest (BARACUS and PHOTON) machine learning pipelines were compared in a subset of control subjects (n = 386). Linear mixed effects models were conducted in the full sample (those with and without PTSD) to examine the effect of PTSD on brain predicted age difference (brain PAD; brain age − chronological age) controlling for chronological age, sex, and scan site. Results BrainageR most accurately predicted brain age in a subset (n = 386) of controls (brainageR: ICC = 0.71, R = 0.72, MAE = 5.68; PHOTON: ICC = 0.61, R = 0.62, MAE = 6.37; BARACUS: ICC = 0.47, R = 0.64, MAE = 8.80). Using brainageR, a three-way interaction revealed that young males with PTSD exhibited higher brain PAD relative to male controls in young and old age groups; old males with PTSD exhibited lower brain PAD compared to male controls of all ages. Discussion Differential impact of PTSD on brain PAD in younger versus older males may indicate a critical window when PTSD impacts brain aging, followed by age-related brain changes that are consonant with individuals without PTSD. Future longitudinal research is warranted to understand how PTSD impacts brain aging across the lifespan

    Remodeling of the Cortical Structural Connectome in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder:Results from the ENIGMA-PGC PTSD Consortium

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is accompanied by disrupted cortical neuroanatomy. We investigated alteration in covariance of structural networks associated with PTSD in regions that demonstrate the case-control differences in cortical thickness (CT) and surface area (SA). METHODS: Neuroimaging and clinical data were aggregated from 29 research sites in >1,300 PTSD cases and >2,000 trauma-exposed controls (age 6.2-85.2 years) by the ENIGMA-PGC PTSD working group. Cortical regions in the network were rank-ordered by effect size of PTSD-related cortical differences in CT and SA. The top-n (n = 2 to 148) regions with the largest effect size for PTSD > non-PTSD formed hypertrophic networks, the largest effect size for PTSD < non-PTSD formed atrophic networks, and the smallest effect size of between-group differences formed stable networks. The mean structural covariance (SC) of a given n-region network was the average of all positive pairwise correlations and was compared to the mean SC of 5,000 randomly generated n-region networks. RESULTS: Patients with PTSD, relative to non-PTSD controls, exhibited lower mean SC in CT-based and SA-based atrophic networks. Comorbid depression, sex and age modulated covariance differences of PTSD-related structural networks. CONCLUSIONS: Covariance of structural networks based on CT and cortical SA are affected by PTSD and further modulated by comorbid depression, sex, and age. The structural covariance networks that are perturbed in PTSD comport with converging evidence from resting state functional connectivity networks and networks impacted by inflammatory processes, and stress hormones in PTSD

    Quality-of-life assessment in dementia: the use of DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy total scores

    Get PDF
    Purpose There is a need to determine whether health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) assessments in dementia capture what is important, to form a coherent basis for guiding research and clinical and policy decisions. This study investigated structural validity of HRQL assessments made using the DEMQOL system, with particular interest in studying domains that might be central to HRQL, and the external validity of these HRQL measurements. Methods HRQL of people with dementia was evaluated by 868 self-reports (DEMQOL) and 909 proxy reports (DEMQOL-Proxy) at a community memory service. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA) were conducted using bifactor models to investigate domains that might be central to general HRQL. Reliability of the general and specific factors measured by the bifactor models was examined using omega (?) and omega hierarchical (? h) coefficients. Multiple-indicators multiple-causes models were used to explore the external validity of these HRQL measurements in terms of their associations with other clinical assessments. Results Bifactor models showed adequate goodness of fit, supporting HRQL in dementia as a general construct that underlies a diverse range of health indicators. At the same time, additional factors were necessary to explain residual covariation of items within specific health domains identified from the literature. Based on these models, DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy overall total scores showed excellent reliability (? h > 0.8). After accounting for common variance due to a general factor, subscale scores were less reliable (? h < 0.7) for informing on individual differences in specific HRQL domains. Depression was more strongly associated with general HRQL based on DEMQOL than on DEMQOL-Proxy (?0.55 vs ?0.22). Cognitive impairment had no reliable association with general HRQL based on DEMQOL or DEMQOL-Proxy. Conclusions The tenability of a bifactor model of HRQL in dementia suggests that it is possible to retain theoretical focus on the assessment of a general phenomenon, while exploring variation in specific HRQL domains for insights on what may lie at the ‘heart’ of HRQL for people with dementia. These data suggest that DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy total scores are likely to be accurate measures of individual differences in HRQL, but that subscale scores should not be used. No specific domain was solely responsible for general HRQL at dementia diagnosis. Better HRQL was moderately associated with less depressive symptoms, but this was less apparent based on informant reports. HRQL was not associated with severity of cognitive impairment

    USF St. Petersburg by the Decades : 1965 - 1975 : Early Years of the \u27Bayboro\u27 Campus

    No full text
    The first session of a five-part lecture series that celebrated the history of University of South Florida St. Petersburg. This program took place in the Poynter Corner of the Poynter Library. Videography by Robert Vessenmeyer; Photography by Kaya van Beynen.https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/usfsp_50th_decades_images/1000/thumbnail.jp

    USF St. Petersburg by the Decades : 1965 - 1975 : Early Years of the \u27Bayboro\u27 Campus

    No full text
    The first session of a five-part lecture series that celebrated the history of University of South Florida St. Petersburg. This program took place in the Poynter Corner of the Poynter Library. Videography by Robert Vessenmeyer; Photography by Kaya van Beynen.https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/usfsp_50th_decades_images/1007/thumbnail.jp

    USF St. Petersburg by the Decades : 1965 - 1975 : Early Years of the \u27Bayboro\u27 Campus

    No full text
    The first session of a five-part lecture series that celebrated the history of University of South Florida St. Petersburg. This program took place in the Poynter Corner of the Poynter Library. Videography by Robert Vessenmeyer; Photography by Kaya van Beynen.https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/usfsp_50th_decades_images/1013/thumbnail.jp
    • 

    corecore