Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Fig 1.
Effect of type and level of statistical correction. All SPMs show the same contrast: regions in which the early HD group has reduced GM volume relative to controls (this is true throughout the article unless otherwise stated). SPMs are smoothed at 4-mm FWHM. The 3 SPMs in the top panel show various levels of FWE correction, and the 3 SPMs below show various levels of uncorrected SPMs. The color bar shows the t value and is applicable to all figures in this article.
- Fig 2.
Effect of using modulated or unmodulated data. Both SPMs show the same contrast of early HD versus controls, corrected at FWE P < .05, smoothed at 4-mm FWHM.
- Fig 3.
Effect of smoothing kernel size. All SPMs show early HD versus controls, corrected at FWE P < .05. The SPMs are smoothed at 4-, 6-, and 8-mm FWHM.
- Fig 4.
Graphs demonstrate how TIV and total GM volume vary with age and motor score (an index of HD severity). The top 2 graphs show that the relationship between TIV and both age and motor score is small and not statistically significant. The bottom 2 graphs show that total GM volume decreases with age (r = −0.26, P = .017) and motor score (r = −0.31, P = .0493).
- Fig 5.
Effects of adjusting for TIV with and without including total GM volume. All SPMs show early HD versus controls, corrected at FWE P < .05, smoothed at 4-mm FWHM. The top row shows the effect of including or excluding TIV as a covariate. The bottom row shows the effect of adjusting for total GM volume with and without TIV.
- Fig 6.
Subgroup analyses. The left SPM shows regions in which a group of high motor scorers have reduced GM volume relative to matched controls. The center SPM shows regions in which a group of low motor scorers have reduced GM volume relative to controls. The right SPM shows the results when the high and low motor scorer groups are compared directly.
Tables
Control Premanifest Early HD (n = 20) (n = 21) (n = 40) Gender (M:F) 7:13 10:11 20:20 Age (yr) 44.9 (10.5) 37.2 (7.9) 48.5 (9.6) CAG repeat length NA 42.2 (1.8), range, 40–45 43.7 (2.4), range, 40–50 Predicted years to onsetb NA 18.2 (7.1), range, 9–35 NA Disease duration (yr since onset) NA NA 4.1 (2.6) UHDRS motorc 1.1 (0.9) 3.6 (4.0) 28.9 (12.6) UHDRS independenced 100 (0) 100 (0) 90.4 (9.6) UHDRS TFCe 13 (0) 13 (0) 10.9 (1.8) -
a Data are mean (SD) with the exception of gender and handedness.
-
b Onset was defined as a 60% chance of showing motor signs (a greater chance of showing signs than not, as described in Feigin et al30) and was predicted using the equation of Langbehn et al.31
-
c UHDRS motor is out of 124; higher score indicates more severely impaired.
-
d Independence is a percentage; higher score indicates better function.
-
e TFC is out of 13; higher score indicates better function.
-
Study SPM Version Normalization Segmentation Mod. Smoothing FWHM (mm) Correction Thieben et al32 99 Study-specific GM template, patients and controls Unspecified Yes 10 SPM uncorrected, p < .005; reported results mostly small-volume-corrected Ho et al33 99 Study-specific GM template, all controls only Study-specific GM template, all controls only Yes 12 SPM and reported results uncorrected, P < .0001; cluster 10 voxels Kassubek et al18 99 Study-specific template, whole-brain or GM unspecified; subjects unspecified Unspecified No 6 SPM and reported results FWE P < .001; clusters 54 voxels Kassubek et al34 99 Study-specific template, 50:50 patients:controls; whole-brain or GM unspecified Study-specific template, 50:50 patients:controls Yes 6 SPM and reported results FWE P < .001 Peinemann et al26 99 Study-specific template, whole-brain or GM only unspecified; subjects unspecified Unspecified No 6 SPM and reported results FWE P < .05 Douaud et al35 2 Study-specific symmetric GM template, 50:50 patients:controls, from original and mid-plane-reflected images Study-specific GM template, 50:50 patients:controls, from original and symmetric images Yes 8 SPM and reported results FDR P < .01 Barrios et al27 Not specified Standard whole-brain template Not specified No 4 SPM and reported results uncorrected; P < .01, clusters >10 mm3 Gavazzi et al36 2 Study-specific GM template, subjects unspecified Study-specific GM template, subjects unspecified Yes 10 SPM and reported results corrected; P < .01 (type unspecified) Jech et al37 2 Study-specific GM template, all patients; no controls in study Study-specific GM template, all patients; no controls in study Yes 10 SPM uncorrected P < .001; reported results uncorrected in striatum or rolandic area, P < .001, elsewhere, FDR P < .05 Kipps et al38 2 Study-specific template, patients and controls, exact makeup unspecified Not specified Yes 8 Uncorrected, P < .05 Mühlau et al39 2 Study-specific prior probability maps, subjects and whether used for normalization as well as segmentation unspecified Yes 8 SPM and reported results FWE P <.05, extent P <.05, clusters P < .001 Mühlau et al25 2 Study-specific prior probability maps, subjects and whether used for normalization as well as segmentation unspecified Yes 8 SPM and reported results FWE P < .05, clusters P < .05 Ruocco et al40 2 Study-specific GM template, healthy volunteers otherwise unused in study Study-specific GM template, healthy volunteers otherwise unused in study Yes 10 SPM and reported results FDR P < .05 Wolf et al41 2 Study-specific whole-brain template, 50:50 patients:controls Study-specific GM templates, 50:50 patients:controls Yes 8 SPM not shown; reported results FWE P < .001 Henley et al7 2 Standard GM template Standard GM template Yes 8 SPM and reported results small-volume corrected FDR P < .05 Wolf et al42 2 Study-specific whole-brain template, 50:50 patients:controls Study-specific GM templates, 50:50 patients:controls Yes 8 SPM and reported results FWE P < .001 -
a Studies are listed by year and then author.
-
