Psychosocial risk factors on hippocampal subfield volumes: the Medea‐7T study. (20th December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Twait, Emma L.; Blom, Kim; Koek, Huiberdina L.; Zwartbol, Maarten H.T.; Ghaznawi, Rashid; Hendrikse, Jeroen; Biessels, Geert Jan; Geerlings, Mirjam I.
• Is Part Of: Alzheimer's & dementia. Volume 18(2022)Supplement 7
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2022-12-20
• Subjects: Alzheimer's disease -- Periodicals; Alzheimer Disease -- Periodicals; Dementia -- Periodicals; Démence; Maladie d'Alzheimer; Périodique électronique (Descripteur de forme); Ressource Internet (Descripteur de forme); 616.83
• DOI: 10.1002/alz.064472
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1552-5260

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Specific subfields within the hippocampus have shown vulnerability to chronic stress, highlighting the importance of looking regionally within the hippocampus to understand the role of psychosocial risk factors in the development of neurodegenerative diseases. The current study had two aims: to perform a systematic review on psychosocial factors and hippocampal subfield volume and to explore the association of psychosocial factors with hippocampal volume, both total volume and among subfields, using high‐field 7T MRI. Method: Within the Memory Depression and Aging (Medea)‐7T study, 333 participants without dementia underwent 7T MRI and answered psychosocial questionnaires. Hippocampal subfields were automatically segmented from T2‐weighted images using ASHS software. Generalized linear models accounting for correlated outcomes were used to assess the association between subfields (i.e., entorhinal cortex, subiculum, Cornu Ammonis (CA)1, CA2, CA3, dentate gyrus, and tail) and each psychosocial factor (i.e., depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, childhood maltreatment, recent life events, and social support), adjusting for age, sex, and intracranial volume. Result: Neither depression nor anxiety was associated with specific hippocampal (sub)volumes. Recent life events were associated with greater total volume (B = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.07; 0.27). However, reporting childhood maltreatment was associated with smaller total hippocampal volume (B per standard deviation = ‐0.20, 95% CI: ‐0.31; ‐0.10). Among subfields, high social support was associated with greater volume in the CA3 (B = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.21; 0.73). Conclusion: This study suggests possible differential effects among hippocampal (sub)volumes and psychosocial factors, specifically reporting childhood maltreatment and social support. The systematic review highlighted inconsistencies in results, highlighting the need for future studies validating these results.