Skip to main content
Log in

Global and regional annual brain volume loss rates in physiological aging

  • Original Communication
  • Published:
Journal of Neurology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective is to estimate average global and regional percentage brain volume loss per year (BVL/year) of the physiologically ageing brain. Two independent, cross-sectional single scanner cohorts of healthy subjects were included. The first cohort (n = 248) was acquired at the Medical Prevention Center (MPCH) in Hamburg, Germany. The second cohort (n = 316) was taken from the Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (OASIS). Brain parenchyma (BP), grey matter (GM), white matter (WM), corpus callosum (CC), and thalamus volumes were calculated. A non-parametric technique was applied to fit the resulting age–volume data. For each age, the BVL/year was derived from the age–volume curves. The resulting BVL/year curves were compared between the two cohorts. For the MPCH cohort, the BVL/year curve of the BP was an increasing function starting from 0.20% at the age of 35 years increasing to 0.52% at 70 years (corresponding values for GM ranged from 0.32 to 0.55%, WM from 0.02 to 0.47%, CC from 0.07 to 0.48%, and thalamus from 0.25 to 0.54%). Mean absolute difference between BVL/year trajectories across the age range of 35–70 years was 0.02% for BP, 0.04% for GM, 0.04% for WM, 0.11% for CC, and 0.02% for the thalamus. Physiological BVL/year rates were remarkably consistent between the two cohorts and independent from the scanner applied. Average BVL/year was clearly age and compartment dependent. These results need to be taken into account when defining cut-off values for pathological annual brain volume loss in disease models, such as multiple sclerosis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barkhof F et al (2009) Imaging outcomes for neuroprotection and repair in multiple sclerosis trials. Nat Rev Neurol 5(5):256–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Steenwijk MD et al (2016) Cortical atrophy patterns in multiple sclerosis are non-random and clinically relevant. Brain 139(Pt 1):115–126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fisher E et al (2008) Gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis: a longitudinal study. Ann Neurol 64(3):255–265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sepulcre J et al (2006) Regional gray matter atrophy in early primary progressive multiple sclerosis: a voxel-based morphometry study. Arch Neurol 63(8):1175–1180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Audoin B et al (2006) Localization of grey matter atrophy in early RRMS: a longitudinal study. J Neurol 253(11):1495–1501

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Datta S et al (2015) Regional gray matter atrophy in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: baseline analysis of multi-center data. Mult Scler Relat Disord 4(2):124–136

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Zivadinov R et al (2013) Evolution of cortical and thalamus atrophy and disability progression in early relapsing-remitting MS during 5 years. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 34(10):1931–1939

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rocca MA et al (2010) Thalamic damage and long-term progression of disability in multiple sclerosis. Radiology 257(2):463–469

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Schoonheim MM et al (2012) Subcortical atrophy and cognition: sex effects in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 79(17):1754–1761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pelletier J et al (2001) A longitudinal study of callosal atrophy and interhemispheric dysfunction in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 58:105–111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Uher T et al (2016) Combining clinical and magnetic resonance imaging markers enhances prediction of 12-year disability in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. doi:10.1177/1352458516642314

    Google Scholar 

  12. De Stefano N et al (2016) Establishing pathological cut-offs of brain atrophy rates in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 87(1):93–99

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ziegler G et al (2012) Brain structural trajectories over the adult lifespan. Hum Brain Mapp 33(10):2377–2389

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Marcus DS et al (2007) Open access series of imaging studies (OASIS): cross-sectional MRI data in young, middle aged, nondemented, and demented older adults. J Cogn Neurosci 19(9):1498–1507

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ge Y et al (2002) Age-related total gray matter and white matter changes in normal adult brain. Part I: volumetric MR imaging analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 23(8):1327–1333

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fotenos AF et al (2005) Normative estimates of cross-sectional and longitudinal brain volume decline in aging and AD. Neurology 64(6):1032–1039

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fjell AM et al (2013) Critical ages in the life course of the adult brain: nonlinear subcortical aging. Neurobiol Aging 34(10):2239–2247

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Marcus DS et al (2010) Open access series of imaging studies: longitudinal MRI data in nondemented and demented older adults. J Cogn Neurosci 22(12):2677–2684

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Hedman AM et al (2012) Human brain changes across the life span: a review of 56 longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging studies. Hum Brain Mapp 33(8):1987–2002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Enzinger C et al (2005) Risk factors for progression of brain atrophy in aging: six-year follow-up of normal subjects. Neurology 64(10):1704–1711

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Opfer R et al (2016) Atlas based brain volumetry: how to distinguish regional volume changes due to biological or physiological effects from inherent noise of the methodology. Magn Reson Imaging 34(4):455–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Huppertz HJ et al (2010) Intra- and interscanner variability of automated voxel-based volumetry based on a 3D probabilistic atlas of human cerebral structures. Neuroimage 49(3):2216–2224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ashburner J, Friston KJ (2005) Unified segmentation. Neuroimage 26(3):839–851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ashburner J (2007) A fast diffeomorphic image registration algorithm. Neuroimage 38(1):95–113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Mori S et al (2008) Stereotaxic white matter atlas based on diffusion tensor imaging in an ICBM template. Neuroimage 40(2):570–582

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Malone IB et al (2015) Accurate automatic estimation of total intracranial volume: a nuisance variable with less nuisance. Neuroimage 104:366–372

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Keihaninejad S et al (2010) A robust method to estimate the intracranial volume across MRI field strengths (1.5T and 3T). Neuroimage 50(4):1427–1437

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Pell GS et al (2008) Selection of the control group for VBM analysis: influence of covariates, matching and sample size. Neuroimage 41(4):1324–1335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Friedman J, Hastie T, Tibshirani R (2001) The elements of statistical learning (chapter 6), vol 1. Springer Series in Statistics, Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bowman AW, Azzalini A (1997) Applied smoothing techniques for data analysis: the kernel approach with S-Plus illustrations: the kernel approach with S-Plus illustrations. OUP, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  31. Fjell AM et al (2013) Brain changes in older adults at very low risk for Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurosci 33(19):8237–8242

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. De Stefano N et al (2010) Assessing brain atrophy rates in a large population of untreated multiple sclerosis subtypes. Neurology 74(23):1868–1876

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Filippi M et al (2014) Placebo-controlled trial of oral laquinimod in multiple sclerosis: MRI evidence of an effect on brain tissue damage. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 85(8):851–858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Pfefferbaum A et al (2013) Variation in longitudinal trajectories of regional brain volumes of healthy men and women (ages 10 to 85 years) measured with atlas-based parcellation of MRI. Neuroimage 65:176–193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Pfefferbaum A, Sullivan EV (2015) Cross-sectional versus longitudinal estimates of age-related changes in the adult brain: overlaps and discrepancies. Neurobiol Aging 36(9):2563–2567

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Lindenberger U et al (2011) Cross-sectional age variance extraction: what’s change got to do with it? Psychol Aging 26(1):34–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Gordon BA et al (2008) Neuroanatomical correlates of aging, cardiopulmonary fitness level, and education. Psychophysiology 45(5):825–838

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Noble KG et al (2012) Hippocampal volume varies with educational attainment across the life-span. Front Hum Neurosci 6:307

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Foubert-Samier A et al (2012) Education, occupation, leisure activities, and brain reserve: a population-based study. Neurobiol Aging 33(2):423.e15–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Fjell AM et al (2010) When does brain aging accelerate? Dangers of quadratic fits in cross-sectional studies. Neuroimage 50(4):1376–1383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The OASIS database is made available by the Washington University Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center, Dr. Randy Buckner at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) at Harvard University, the Neuroinformatics Research Group (NRG) at Washington University School of Medicine, and the Biomedical Informatics Research Network (BIRN), and supported by NIH grants P50 AG05681, P01 AG03991, R01 AG021910, P50 MH071616, U24 RR021382, R01 MH56584.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sven Schippling.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard

The study (MPCH cohort) was approved by the Ethics Board of the Ärztekammer, Hamburg, Germany.

Informed consent

All patients gave written informed consent.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

415_2016_8374_MOESM1_ESM.tiff

Supplementary material 1 (TIFF 264 kb) Fig. 3 Two plots show simulated age–volume trajectories. The trajectories are modelled by a set of quadratic functions \({\text{g}}_{\text{i}} \left( {\text{x}} \right) = {\text{a}}_{\text{i}} {\text{x}}^{2} + {\text{b}}_{\text{i}} {\text{x}} + {\text{c}}_{\text{i}}\) with some random coefficients \({\text{a}}_{\text{i}} ,{\text{b}}_{\text{i}} ,{\text{c}}_{\text{i}}\). The range of the coefficients is estimated from our data. The left plot shows 300 random trajectories and the mean trajectory (black curve). In the right plot, one single timepoint on each trajectory was randomly selected (grey dots). Based on these given single timepoints, the true mean trajectory (black curve) was estimated with the non-parametric technique described in the manuscript (dashed line). We can observe that the “true” mean curve is reasonably close to the estimated curve (dashed line)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schippling, S., Ostwaldt, AC., Suppa, P. et al. Global and regional annual brain volume loss rates in physiological aging. J Neurol 264, 520–528 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-016-8374-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-016-8374-y

Keywords

Navigation