Independent Role of White Matter Hyperintensity Volume and Location in Alzheimer’s Disease Risk Beyond Hippocampal Atrophy

Hyun Ju Yang; Jae Min Song; Joon Hyuk Park

doi:10.30773/pi.2025.0127

Psychiatry Investig > Volume 22(12); 2025 > Article

Yang, Song, and Park: Independent Role of White Matter Hyperintensity Volume and Location in Alzheimer’s Disease Risk Beyond Hippocampal Atrophy

Original Article

Psychiatry Investigation 2025;22(12):1389-1397.

Published online: November 21, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2025.0127

Independent Role of White Matter Hyperintensity Volume and Location in Alzheimer’s Disease Risk Beyond Hippocampal Atrophy

Hyun Ju Yang¹

, Jae Min Song²

, Joon Hyuk Park^1,³

¹Department of Psychiatry, Jeju National University School of Medicine, Jeju National University Hospital, Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, Republic of Korea

²Department of Psychiatry, Jeju Medical Center, Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, Republic of Korea

³Jeju Dementia Center, Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, Republic of Korea

Correspondence: Joon Hyuk Park, MD, PhD Department of Psychiatry, Jeju National University Hospital, 15 Aran 13-gil, Jeju 63241, Republic of Korea Tel: +82-64-754-8157, Fax: +82-64-717-1849 E-mail: empath0125@gmail.com

Received April 16, 2025 Revised July 2, 2025 Accepted September 29, 2025

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Objective

Increases in white matter hyperintensities (WMH) observed on brain MRI are associated with the onset of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and cognitive decline. Recent hypotheses suggest that the impact of WMH on cognition may differ by their distance from the ventricular surface. This study aimed to investigate the effects of WMH volume and location, classified by distance from the ventricular surface, on cognitive function in individuals with AD.

Methods

A total of 112 normal cognition (NC) individuals and 171 patients with AD underwent clinical evaluation, volumetric MRI, and neuropsychological testing using the Korean version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease. WMH volume was categorized as juxtaventricular (JVWMH, <3 mm from ventricle), periventricular (PVWMH, 3-13 mm), and deep (DWMH, >13 mm).

Results

The mean WMH volume was significantly higher in AD group (20.7±18.2 mL) than in the NC group (6.8±8.1 mL, p<0.001). A tenfold increase in WMH volume led to a 5.967-fold increased risk of AD (95% confidence interval [CI]=1.550-22.986). A similar risk association was observed for PVWMH (OR=4.021, 95% CI=1.592-10.156), and DWMH showed a significant risk association (OR= 2.873, 95% CI=1.227-6.731). Total WMH, JVWMH, and PVWMH were associated with poorer performance in verbal fluency and memory tasks, while DWMH showed no significant cognitive association.

Conclusion

WMH volume and location independently contribute to AD risk and cognitive decline, with PVWMH and JVWMH particularly affecting executive and memory functions, regardless of hippocampal atrophy.

Keywords: Alzheimer disease, Neuroimaging, Cognition

INTRODUCTION

Globally, the rapid growth of the aging population has intensified focus on age-related neurodegenerative disorders, particular Alzheimer’s disease (AD), which accounts for 60%-80% of dementia cases [1]. AD imposes substantial social and economic burdens while severely compromising quality of life for patients and caregivers, underscoring the urgency of understanding its pathophysiology [1,2]. Among neuroimaging biomarkers, white matter hyperintensities (WMH)-bright lesions on fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) MRI-have emerged as critical markers of cerebral small vessel disease and neurodegeneration. Prevalence estimated for WMH vary widely, from 39% in individuals aged 55%-85% to 95% in those age 60-90, with longitudinal studies demonstrating progressive increases over time [3-5]. These lesions are linked not only to cognitive decline [6,7] but also to psychiatric symptoms [8,9], motor impairments [7,10], and cerebrovascular disorders [11], highlighting their multifactorial impact on brain health.

The pathogenesis of WMH involves diverse mechanisms, traditionally categorized into ischemic (e.g., atherosclerosis, hypoperfusion) and non-ischemic (e.g., blood-brain barrier dysfunction, neuroinflammation) processes [12]. Kim et al.’s [13] classification system further refines this understanding by correlating WMH location with etiology. Juxtaventricular WMH (JVWMH; >3 mm from vernticles) is associated with non-ischemic subependymal gliosis and disrupted cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) dynamics [13,14], while periventricular WMH (PVWMH; 3-13 mm) and deep WMH (DWMH; >13 mm) reflect ischemic damage from small vessel disease. JVWMH, near the corticomedullary junction, involves distinct U-fiber pathways [15]. Despite these advances, the role of WMH in AD remains contentious. While vascular mechanisms dominate WMH research, recent evidence suggests AD-specific pathways, such as amyloid-β-mediated neuroinflammation or tau-driven axonal degeneration, may contribute to WMH formation independently of vascular pathology [16,17].

Critically, WMH topography may influence their functional impact. Posterior regions, particularly the splenium of the corpus callosum, exhibit stronger associations with cognitive deficits in AD, while PVWMH demonstrate greater links to executive dysfunction than DWMH [18,19]. However, studies often conflate AD with mixed dementia or lack biomarker confirmation, obscuring etiology specific relationships. For instance, amyloid-positive AD patients show elevated WMH volumes in strategic white matter tracts compared to vascular risk factor-matched controls, independent of cortical atrophy [19]. These findings underscore the need to disentangle AD-related WMH from vascular contributions.

This study investigates the impact of WMH volume and location-classified by distance from the ventricular surface (JVWMH, PVWMH, and DWMH)-on AD risk and domainspecific cognitive decline. By integrating etiological stratification with spatial analysis, we aim to clarify whether WMH effects in AD arise from vascular insults, AD-specific neurodegeneration, or synergistic interactions. Our findings could refine diagnostic criteria and therapeutic strategies by elucidating spatially distinct WMH pathways in AD progression.

METHODS

Subjects

This study recruited 283 participants aged 60 years or older, including 112 normal cognition (NC) individuals and 171 patients diagnosed with AD, from the dementia clinic at Jeju National University Hospital (JNUH) in Jeju-do, South Korea. The diagnosis of AD was established based on the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke and the Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Association (NINCDS-ADRDA) criteria [20], incorporating clinical, and neuropsychological evidence, and we included subjects with probable AD and possible AD. All participants underwent comprehensive clinical evaluation, including physical and neurological examinations, laboratory tests to exclude reversible cause of dementia and MRI scans. Neuropsychological assessments were conducted by four trained neuropsychologists using the Korean version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Packet (CERAD-K) [21]. The CERAD-K included tests for verbal fluency, the 15-item Boston Naming Test, the Korean the Korean version of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE-KC), Word List Memory, Constructional Praxis, Word List Recall, Word List Recognition, Constructional Recall, and the Trail Making Test. Exclusion criteria were applied to ensure diagnostic accuracy. Participants with major psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder were excluded, as were those with a history of stoke, focal neurological signs, or other types of dementia. Final diagnoses were reviewed by two dementia-specialized neuropsychiatrists blinded to WMH data. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants or their legal representatives, and the study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of JNUH (JEJUNUH 2020-06-008).

MRI acquisition

MRI scans were performed using a 3.0 T Philips Intera scanner (Philips). The imaging protocol included acquiring three-dimensional (3D) T1-weighted anatomical images with an acquisition voxel size of 1.0×0.5×0.5 mm, a sagittal slice thickness of 1.0 mm with no inter-slice gaps, a repetition time of 4.61 ms, an echo time of 8.15 ms, one excitation, a flip angle of 8°, a field of view of 240×240 mm, and an acquisition matrix size of 175×256×256 mm in the x-, y-, and z-dimensions. Additionally, 3D FLAIR images were obtained with a voxel dimension of 1×1×3 mm³, a repetition time of 9,900 ms, an echo time of 125 ms, an inversion time of 2,800 ms, one excitation, a flip angle of 90°, a field of view of 240 mm, an axial plane matrix of 256×256 mm, a thickness of 3 mm, and no interslice gap. To ensure high-quality imaging results free from motion artifacts that could compromise diagnostic value or analysis reliability, participants received detailed instructions on proper positioning during scans from an experienced imaging technician. After scanning completion, quality control assessments were performed by the radiology specialist.

MRI processing and analysis

Structural volumetric were analyzed using FreeSurfer version 7.0.0 software (Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging) [22] to segment cortical and subcortical regions basedon T1-weighted images. Outputs included total brain volume (TBV), estimated intracranial volume (eICV), and hippocampal volume (HV). WMH segmentation was performed by co-registering FLAIR images with T1-weighted images using Statistical Parametric Mapping version 12 (SPM12; Wellcome Institute of Neurology, University College London) for MATLAB (MathWorks Inc.). Lesion mapping utilized the Lesion Sementation Toolbox for SPM12 to identify WMH regions automatically [23]. WMH spatial classification followed Kim et al.’s distance-based approach using an in-house MATLAB script. Initially, the ventricle was segmented from the T1-weighted image of each subject. A distance map was then generated for each WMH voxel relative to the ventricle. Based on their proximity to the ventricle, each WMH voxel was classified into one of three categories: JVWMH were defined as areas within 4 voxels of the ventricle, PVWMH as those between 4 and 13 voxels, and DWMH as those more than 13 voxels away. The Euclidean distance from each WMH voxel to the nearest ventricle voxel was calculated, resulting in a distance map that encodes these distances.

Additional measures

The apolipoprotein E genotype (APOE) for each participant was identified using a single-stage polymerase chain reaction from venous blood samples, following the procedure outlined by Wenham et al. [24]. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Korean version of the Short Form of the Geriatric Depression Scale (SGDS-K), wihich ranges from scores of 0-15; higher scores indicate greater symptoms severity [25]. Comorbidity burden was quantified using Charlson comorbidity index (CCI, increasingly worse). CCI was used to quantify comorbid condition. Each condition is assigned a weight from 1 to 6, which are summed to calculated a total CCI score for each participant. Its widespread use and validation across multiple studies and settings to its utility and realibility [26].

Statistical analysis

To account for variations in head size among participants, WMH volumes were normalized by dividing total WMH volume by eICV. The ratio variables were log-transformed due to its non-normal distribution. Group comparisons between NC and AD participants utilized analysis of covariance for continuous variables adjusted for age/sex and chi-squared tests for categorical variables here appropriate. Multiple linear regression models assessed associations between logtransformed WMH volumes and covariates including age, sex, years of education, APOE ε4 allele status, HV, SGDS-K, CCI and Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes. To evaluate cognitive associations with WMH subtypes classified by proximity to ventricles (JVWMH/PVWMH/DWMH), CERAD-K subset scores served as dependent variables in regression models adjusted for demographic/clinical covariates. All analyses were conducted using STATA version 15.1 software (Stata Corp.) with statistical significance defined at p<0.05.

RESULTS

Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of participants

In the study, 112 participants were categorized as having NC and 171 as having AD. The mean age of the AD group significantly higher at 80.7 years compared to 73.4 years in the NC group (p<0.001). Sex distribution revealed a higher proportion of females in the AD (70.8%) compared to the NC group (51.8%, p=0.001). Educational attainment was lower in the AD group, with an average of 4.6 years of education versus 10.2 years in the NC group (p<0.001) (Table 1). WMH volumes were log-transformed for analysis, revealing higher values in the AD group across all measures. The total WMH volume in the AD group had an average log value of 4.1±0.4, compared to 3.6±0.4 in the NC group (p<0.001). Similarly, JVWMH had a mean log value of 3.8±0.4 in the AD group versus 3.4±0.4 in the NC group (p<0.001). PVWMH showed an average log value of 3.7±0.6 for the AD group and 2.9±0.7 for the NC group (p<0.001). DWMH also demonstrated higher values in the AD group (2.7±0.7) compared to the NC group (2.1±0.7, p<0.001, t-test) (Table 1 and Supplementary Figure 1).

Factors associated with WMH

To identify factors associated with WMH, a linear regression analysis was conducted. In the NC group, WMH volume was positively associated with age (p=0.002) and eICV (p=0.044), suggesting that older age and larger eICV contribute to increased WMH volume. In contrast, WMH volume in the AD group was associated with age (p<0.001), eICV (p<0.001), and TBV (p=0.049), indicating that older age, larger eICV and smaller TBV were significant predictors of increased WMH volume (Table 2).

Factors associated with AD

To identify factors associated with AD, logistic regression analysis was conducted using age, sex, years of education, presence of the ApoE ε4 status, family history of dementia, HV, WMH, CCI, and the SGDS-K as covariates (Table 3).

Higher educational attainment was associated with reduced risk of AD (odds ratio [OR]=0.796; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.699-1.135), while decreased HV significantly increased the risk (OR=0.998; 95% CI=0.997-0.999). WMH volume was strongly associated with AD risk, with a tenfold increase in WMH volume corresponding to a 5.967-fold increase in AD likelihood (95% CI=1.550-22.986), as the data were logtransformed. Sub-classified WMHs showed distinct associations: JVWMH was not significantly linked to AD risk (p=0.058), but PVWMH and DWMH were significant predictors. A tenfold increase in PVWMH volume resulted in a fourfold increase in AD risk (OR=4.021, p=0.003), while a tenfold increase in DWMH volume led to a nearly threefold increase in risk (OR=2.783, p=0.015).

Impact of white matter hyperintensity on cognitive function

The impact of WMHs on cognitive function was assessed using linear regression models adjusted for demographic and clinical variables across all participants and within NC and AD groups (Tables 4 and 5) (Additionally, the relationship between WMH volume and neuropsychological tests in the all participants is presented in Supplementary Table 1). Total WMH volumes were associated with poorer performance on the Word List Memory Test (p=0.013) and Trail Making Test B (p=0.017) across all participants, while in the NC group, total WMH correlated only with Trail Making Test B performance (p=0.022). In the AD group, total WMH volumes were linked to impaired Verbal Fluency Test scores (p=0.008) and Word List Memory Test scores (p=0.023). For JVWMH, poorer performance on the Boston Naming Test (p=0.021), Word List Memory Test (p=0.023), and Trail Making Test B (p=0.005) was observed across all participants, while in the NC group, JVWMH correlated only with Trail Making Test B performance (p=0.015). In the AD group, JVWMH was associated with Verbal Fluency Test scores (p=0.013) and Forward Digit Span Test scores (p=0.037). PVWMH volumes were associated with Word List Memory Test scores across all participants (p=0.020) but showed no associations within the NC group; however, in the AD group, PVWMH correlated with Verbal Fluency Test scores (p=0.011) and Word List Memory Test scores (p=0.021). DWMH volumes showed no significant associations across all participants except for Trail Making Test B performance in the NC group alone (p=0.039), while no significant associations were found within the AD group.

DISCUSSION

In this study, the average age of participants in the AD group was 80.7 years, significantly higher than the average age of 73.4 years in the NC group (p<0.001). Additionally, the proportion of females was higher in the AD group (70.8%) compared to the NC group (51.8%, p=0.001). The AD group also had a lower average educational attainment of 4.6 years compared to 10.2 years in the NC group (p<0.001). These findings are consistent with previous studies that have identified advanced age, female gender, and lower educational attainment as risk factors for AD [27,28]. Furthermore, WMH volume was significantly larger in the AD group (20.7±18.2 mL) compared to the NC group (6.8±8.1 mL, p<0.001), supporting prior research linking increased WMH volume to AD risk [29,30]. Using automated quantification methods for brain MRI analysis, we confirmed that WMH volume increases with age and is larger in individuals with AD, consistent with previous findings that associated WMH with aging [31] and higher AD risk [3,27,32].

Logistic regression analysis revealed that larger volumes of WMH, PVWMH, and DWMH were associated with an increased risk of AD. Specifically, WMH in individuals with AD was related to dysfunctions in frontal lobe functions such as verbal fluency, immediate memory, and working memory. These findings align with recent studies demonstrating associations between WMH and executive function [33-36], psychomotor speed [33,34,37,38], memory [35,39], language ability [40], attention [41], and global cognitive function [29,42,43]. The relationship between WMH and frontal lobe dysfunction may be explained by its impact on glucose metabolism; ischemic vascular damage predominantly located in the frontal lobe could lead to reduced cortical metabolism and diminished function [44].

This study divided WMH into JVWMH, PVWMH, and DWMH based on etiological and functional considerations to investigate their differ rential impacts on AD risk and cognitive function. Our findings suggest that greater PVWMH and DWMH volumes may be important risk factors for AD. In terms of cognitive function, JVWMH and PVWMH were associated with declines in frontal lobe functions such as executive function, immediate memory, and working memory in individuals with AD, while DWMH did not significantly affect cognitive function. Pathophysiologically, JVWMH is a non-ischemic lesion located within 3 mm of the ventricular surface and is related to CSF outflow, whereas PVWMH is an ischemic lesion located between 3 mmg and 13 mm from the ventricular surface caused by sustained hypoperfusion [13]. These findings suggest that JVWMH and PVWMH have similar effects on cognitive function due to shared microstructural characteristics such as CSF-like free water content; however, DWMH differs structurally as it comprises WM-like material [45].

Although DWMH did not significantly affect cognitive decline in individuals with AD, it was identified as a risk factor for the disease onset. In our study, DWMH volume was found to have a relatively small volume and limited cognitive impact, as confirmed through CERAD-K in AD. However, our multivariate logistic regression analysis, which adjusted for variables such as age, sex, education level, and hippocampal atrophy, confirmed that increased DWMH volume is independently associated with AD risk.

This study has several limitations. Firstly, it was conducted at a single institution within one region, limiting the generalizability; multi-institutional studies across diverse regions are needed to validate these findings. Secondly, as a cross-sectional study, this research examined association between WMH volume and cognitive function at a single point in time; longitudinal studies could provide insights into changes in WMH volume over time and their impact on AD progression and cognitive decline. Thirdly, while this study contributes by classifying WMH based on distance from the ventricular surface into three regions and examining their association with cognitive function, it did not analyze cerebral cortex regions by individual lobes. Lastly, although we adjusted for comorbidity burden using the CCI, this composite measure may not fully capture vascular risk. Sensitivity analyses including hypertension and diabetes as separate covariates yielded results consistent with our primary findings, but reliance on the CCI remains a limitation. Future research could benefit from categorizing WMH according to brain lobes—such as the frontal, temporal, parietal, and occipital lobes—and further subclassifying them into JVWMH, PVWMH, and DWMH within each lobe to elucidate nuanced differences based on both lobe location and proximity to ventricles.

Supplementary Materials

The Supplement is available with this article at https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2025.0127.

Supplementary Table 1.

The association between WMH volume and neuropsychological tests in all participants

pi-2025-0127-Supplementary-Table-1.pdf

Supplementary Figure 1.

Boxplots comparing WMH and sub-classfied WMH volume between NC group and AD group. WMH, white matter hyperintensities; log WMH, logarithms of WMH; Log JVWMH, logarithms of juxtaventricular WMH; Log PVWMH, logarithms of periventricular WMH; Log DWMH, logarithms of deep WMH; NC, normal control; AD, Alzheimer’s disease.

pi-2025-0127-Supplementary-Fig-1.pdf

Notes

Availability of Data and Material

The datasets generated or analyzed during the study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: Hyun Ju Yang, Jae Min Song. Data acquisition: Hyun Ju Yang, Jae Min Song. Formal analysis: Joon Hyuk Park. Funding acquisition: Hyun Ju Yang, Joon Hyuk Park. Writing—original draft: Hyun Ju Yang, Jae Min Song. Writing—review & editing: Hyun Ju Yang, Joon Hyuk Park.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by a research grant from Jeju National University Hospital in 2020.

Acknowledgments

None

Table 1.

Comparison of demographic and clinical characteristics between NC and AD group

	NC (N=112)	AD (N=171)	p
Age (yr)	73.4±4.6	80.7±6.6	<0.001^**
Sex, female	58 (51.8)	121 (70.8)	0.001^**
Education (yr)	10.2±4.9	4.6±4.6	<0.001^**
WMH (mL)	6.8±8.1	20.7±18.2	<0.001^**
JVWMH	3.7±3.0	8.9±5.5	<0.001^**
PVWMH	2.8±5.0	10.6±1.2	<0.001^**
DWMH	0.4±0.6	1.3±2.4	<0.001^**
Log WMH	3.6±0.4	4.1±0.4	<0.001^**
Log JVWMH	3.4±0.4	3.8±0.4	<0.001^**
Log PVWMH	2.9±0.7	3.7±0.6	<0.001^**
Log DWMH	2.1±0.7	2.7±0.7	<0.001^**
eICV (mL)	1,569.2±157.8	1,495.7±171.0	<0.001^**
TBV (mL)	1,078.4±90.9	994.7±97.8	<0.001^**
HV (mL)	6.5±0.7	5.1±0.8	<0.001^**
ApoE4	22 (27.5)	58 (43.0)	0.016^*
CCI	4.1±1.3	3.9±1.4	0.496
SGDS-K	6.1±4.6	5.6±4.1	0.414

Data are mean±SD values or N (%). An independent sample t-test was performed for continuous data. A chi-square test was performed for categorical data.

^* p<0.05;

^** p<0.01.

NC, normal cognition; AD, Alzheimer’s disease; WMH, white matter hyperintensities; JVWMH, juxtaventricular WMH; PVWMH, periventricular WMH; DWMH, deep WMH; TBV, total brain volume; eICV, estimated intracranial volume; HV, hippocampal volume; ApoE4, apolipoprotein E ε4 allele; CCI, Charlson comorbidity index; SGDSK, Korean version of the short from geriatric depression scale.

Table 2.

Multivariate linear regression analysis of various factors associated with WMH volume in the groups

Factors	Total subjects					NC group					AD group
Factors	Coef.	SE	β	t	p	Coef.	SE	β	t	p	Coef.	SE	β	t	p
Age	0.027	0.005	0.368	5.55	<0.001^**	0.035	0.011	0.355	3.18	0.002^**	0.021	0.005	0.331	3.88	<0.001^**
Sex	0.092	0.080	0.089	1.16	0.249	0.229	0.150	0.244	1.53	0.132	0.060	0.094	0.066	0.64	0.522
Education	-0.004	0.006	-0.040	-0.62	0.539	0.014	0.012	0.139	1.17	0.246	-0.011	0.008	-0.121	-1.43	0.156
ApoE4	0.015	0.056	0.014	0.26	0.791	0.086	0.108	0.084	0.80	0.429	-0.045	0.068	-0.052	-0.65	0.514
eICV	0.000	0.000	0.549	4.77	<0.001^**	0.000	0.000	0.547	2.06	0.044^*	0.000	0.000	0.589	3.93	<0.001^**
TBV	0.000	0.000	-0.201	-1.69	0.092	0.000	0.000	0.053	0.22	0.826	0.000	0.000	-0.300	-1.99	0.049^*
HV	0.000	0.000	-0.052	-0.65	0.518	0.000	0.000	-0.168	-1.31	0.196	0.000	0.000	0.095	1.03	0.307
CCI	0.019	0.020	0.055	0.99	0.323	0.030	0.038	0.082	0.79	0.431	0.008	0.023	0.029	0.38	0.707
SGDS-K	0.007	0.007	0.055	1.02	0.307	0.005	0.011	0.047	0.46	0.649	0.012	0.008	0.107	1.42	0.157
CDR-SOB	0.048	0.012	0.296	4.14	<0.001^**	0.473	0.428	0.117	1.10	0.273	0.027	0.014	0.154	1.97	0.051

^* p<0.05;

^** p<0.01.

WMH volume, logarithms of white matter hyperintensities volume; NC, normal cognition; AD, Alzheimer’s disease; Coef., regression coefficient; SE, standard error; β, standardized regression coefficient; ApoE4, apolipoprotein E ε4 allele; eICV, estimated intracranial volume; CCI, Charlson comorbidity index; SGDS-K, Korean version of the short from geriatric depression scale; CDR-SOB, Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes.

Table 3.

Multivariate logistic regression analysis of various factors including WMH and sub-classified WMH volume associated with Alzheimer’s disease

	WMH volume			JVWMH volume			PVWMH volume			DWMH volume
	OR	95% CI	p	OR	95% CI	p	OR	95% CI	p	OR	95% CI	p
WMH volume	5.967	1.550-22.986	0.009^**	4.801	0.948-24.330	0.058	4.021	1.592-10.156	0.003^**	2.873	1.227-6.731	0.015^*
Age	1.022	0.920-1.135	0.685	1.040	0.939-1.153	0.451	1.014	0.911-1.128	0.802	1.052	0.953-1.161	0.318
Sex	0.370	0.088-1.550	0.174	0.344	0.085-1.388	0.134	0.360	0.845-1.530	0.166	0.335	0.813-1.377	0.129
Education (yrs)	0.796	0.699-1.135	0.001^**	0.793	0.697-0.902	<0.001^**	0.789	0.691-0.901	<0.001^**	0.789	0.694-0.897	<0.001^**
APoE4	1.990	0.660-6.007	0.222	2.092	0.707-6.190	0.182	1.950	0.634-5.980	0.243	1.852	0.616-5.570	0.273
FHx of dementia	2.716	0.829-8.895	0.099	2.549	0.811-8.011	0.109	2.930	0.865-9.921	0.084	2.193	0.686-7.004	0.185
HV	0.998	0.997-0.999	<0.001^**	0.998	0.997-0.999	<0.001^**	0.998	0.997-0.999	<0.001^**	0.998	0.997-0.999	<0.001^**
CCI	1.169	0.830-1.131	0.371	1.167	0.830-1.641	0.375	1.192	0.844-1.684	0.318	1.126	0.800-1.584	0.015^*
SGDS-K	0.989	0.864-1.131	0.865	1.002	0.880-1.151	0.976	0.970	0.844-1.115	0.669	0.997	0.873-1.140	0.965

Logarithms of ratio of WMH volume to eICV is an independent variable.

^* p<0.05;

^** p<0.01.

WMH, white matter hyperintensities; JVWMH, juxtaventricular WMH; PVWMH, periventricular WMH; DWMH, deep WMH; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; ApoE4, apolipoprotein E ε4 allele; FHX, family history; HV, hippocampal volume; CCI, Charlson comorbidity index; SGDS-K, Korean version of the short from geriatric depression scale.

Table 4.

The association between WMH volume and neuropsychological tests in normal cognition group

	Total WMH volume				JVWMH volume				PVWMH volume				DWMH volume
	Coef.	SE	β	p	Coef.	SE	β	p	Coef.	SE	β	p	Coef.	SE	β	p
Categorical verbal fluency	-0.171	1.040	-0.016	0.870	-0.452	1.270	-0.345	0.723	0.211	0.616	0.329	0.733	0.399	0.613	0.060	0.516
Boston naming test	-0.681	0.535	-0.122	0.206	-0.816	0.654	-0.119	0.215	-0.213	0.319	-0.064	0.506	0.030	0.311	0.009	0.924
MMSE-KC	-0.689	0.489	-0.136	0.162	-0.647	0.601	-0.104	0.284	-0.423	0.290	-0.139	0.149	-0.352	0.277	-0.118	0.205
Word list memory	-0.681	0.956	-0.071	0.478	-0.881	1.168	-0.076	0.452	-0.354	0.567	-0.062	0.534	-0.366	0.572	-0.016	0.523
Constructional praxis	-0.124	0.314	-0.036	0.695	0.117	0.384	0.028	0.760	-0.108	0.186	-0.052	0.562	-0.284	0.183	-0.133	0.125
Word list recall	-0.251	0.455	-0.056	0.582	0.336	0.557	-0.061	0.547	-0.143	0.269	-0.534	0.597	-0.127	0.274	-0.044	0.645
Word list recognition	-0.036	0.320	-0.012	0.910	-0.275	0.390	-0.076	0.482	0.120	0.189	0.068	0.528	0.140	0.188	0.076	0.459
Constructional recall	0.430	0.620	0.070	0.490	0.471	0.758	0.663	0.536	0.233	0.367	0.063	0.527	0.240	0.373	0.061	0.523
Trail making A	4.451	10.193	0.038	0.663	-0.248	12.470	-0.002	0.984	4.985	6.022	0.070	0.410	4.872	5.952	0.068	0.415
Train making B	46.886	20.190	0.186	0.022^*	60.800	24.588	0.197	0.015^*	21.079	12.098	0.139	0.082	25.507	12.204	0.159	0.039^*
Digit span test forward	-0.046	0.319	-0.013	0.887	-0.159	0.390	-0.037	0.684	0.077	0.186	0.038	0.683	0.125	0.192	0.057	0.514
Digit span test backward	-0.165	0.385	-0.054	0.670	-0.202	0.462	-0.054	0.663	-0.021	0.237	-0.011	0.930	0.071	0.211	0.040	0.737
Stroop word	2.138	7.195	0.038	0.767	2.790	8.579	0.041	0.746	1.821	4.207	0.054	0.666	3.558	4.035	0.104	0.381
Stroop color	0.196	4.100	0.005	0.962	-0.973	4.989	-0.022	0.846	0.827	2.438	0.037	0.735	2.152	2.389	0.092	0.371
Stroop word and color	0.297	3.558	0.010	0.934	-0.522	4.345	-0.015	0.905	0.372	2.114	0.022	0.861	0.671	2.094	0.037	0.750
Frontal assessment battery	0.352	1.122	0.034	0.754	0.326	1.345	0.026	0.809	0.204	0.372	0.033	0.762	0.204	0.618	0.032	0.743

p value (p<0.05) was obtained by multivariate linear regression analysis; Logarithms of ratio of WMH volume to eICV is an independent variable; Analyses were adjusted by sex, year group, years of education, hippocampal volume, Charlson comorbidity index, Korean version of the short from geriatric depression scale.

^* p<0.05.

WMH, white matter hyperintensities; JVWMH, juxtaventricular WMH; PVWMH, periventricular WMH; DWMH, deep WMH; Coef., regression coefficient; SE, standard error; β, standardized regression coefficient; MMSE-KC, Korean version of mini-mental state examination; eICV, estimated intracranial volume.

Table 5.

The association between WMH volume and neuropsychological tests in Alzheimer`s disease group

	Total WMH volume				JVWMH volume				PVWMH volume				DWMH volume
	Coef.	SE	β	p	Coef.	SE	β	p	Coef.	SE	β	p	Coef.	SE	β	p
Categorical verbal fluency	-2.012	0.748	-0.212	0.008^**	-2.333	0.924	-0.203	0.013^*	-1.321	0.514	-0.201	0.011^*	-0.634	0.448	-0.104	0.159
Boston naming test	-0.751	0.554	-0.091	0.177	-1.177	0.682	-0.118	0.087	-0.454	0.380	-0.080	0.234	-0.150	0.328	-0.028	0.649
MMSE-KC	-0.508	0.985	-0.034	0.607	-0.849	1.208	-0.047	0.483	-0.363	0.681	-0.034	0.594	0.492	0.580	0.051	0.398
Word list memory	-1.641	0.716	-0.161	0.023^*	-1.686	0.888	-0.136	0.060	-1.144	0.491	-0.161	0.021^*	-0.399	0.428	-0.061	0.353
Constructional praxis	-0.576	0.512	-0.078	0.263	-0.683	0.634	-0.076	0.283	-0.342	0.352	-0.067	0.333	-0.231	0.303	-0.053	0.408
Word list recall	0.221	0.255	0.072	0.386	0.582	0.311	0.136	0.063	0.090	0.175	0.042	0.606	-0.102	0.150	-0.052	0.498
Word list recognition	-0.684	0.586	-0.094	0.245	-0.336	0.726	-0.038	0.644	-0.541	0.401	-0.107	0.180	-0.223	0.347	-0.048	0.521
Constructional recall	-0.192	0.319	-0.048	0.548	-0.134	0.395	-0.297	0.735	-0.173	0.218	-0.063	0.429	-0.069	0.188	-0.027	0.714
Trail making A	4.719	20.258	0.016	0.816	-6.110	24.885	-0.017	0.806	5.110	13.901	0.024	0.714	6.299	11.836	0.033	0.595
Train making B	16.529	13.060	0.120	0.209	29.940	18.148	0.161	0.102	8.796	8.660	0.095	0.312	-0.970	7.515	-0.011	0.898
Digit span test forward	-0.549	0.395	-0.122	0.168	-0.986	0.467	-0.188	0.037^*	-0.262	0.273	-0.084	0.340	-0.030	0.248	-0.010	0.904
Digit span test backward	0.268	0.315	0.082	0.398	0.431	0.385	0.110	0.266	0.131	0.220	0.056	0.553	-0.001	0.185	-0.001	0.995
Stroop word	-0.726	5.810	-0.012	0.901	-1.119	8.149	-0.014	0.891	-0.503	3.936	-0.012	0.899	0.065	3.392	0.002	0.985
Stroop color	-4.187	4.319	-0.084	0.335	-3.911	5.935	-0.059	0.511	-3.067	2.85	-0.093	0.284	-1.326	2.455	-0.043	0.590
Stroop word and color	3.484	3.508	0.097	0.323	4.545	4.807	0.095	0.347	1.782	2.324	0.075	0.445	2.109	1.977	-0.096	0.289
Frontal assessment battery	-0.594	1.119	-0.046	0.596	0.386	1.550	0.022	0.804	-0.721	0.748	-0.083	0.337	-0.737	0.607	-0.098	0.227

^* p<0.05;

^** p<0.01.

WMH, white matter hyperintensities; JVWMH, juxtaventricular WMH; PVWMH, periventricular WMH; DWMH, deep WMH; Coef., regression coefficient; SE, standard error; β, standardized regression coefficient; MMSEKC, Korean version of mini-mental state examination; eICV, estimated intracranial volume.

REFERENCES

1. Garnier-Crussard A, Cotton F, Krolak-Salmon P, Chételat G. White matter hyperintensities in Alzheimer’s disease: beyond vascular contribution. Alzheimers Dement 2023;19:3738-3748.

2. Ye S, Dong S, Tan J, Chen L, Yang H, Chen Y, et al. White-matter hyperintensities and lacunar infarcts are associated with an increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease in the elderly in China. J Clin Neurol 2019;15:46-53.

3. Prins ND, Scheltens P. White matter hyperintensities, cognitive impairment and dementia: an update. Nat Rev Neurol 2015;11:157-165.

4. Ylikoski A, Erkinjuntti T, Raininko R, Sarna S, Sulkava R, Tilvis R. White matter hyperintensities on MRI in the neurologically nondiseased elderly: analysis of cohorts of consecutive subjects aged 55 to 85 years living at home. Stroke 1995;26:1171-1177.

5. van Dijk EJ, Prins ND, Vrooman HA, Hofman A, Koudstaal PJ, Breteler MM. Progression of cerebral small vessel disease in relation to risk factors and cognitive consequences: Rotterdam scan study. Stroke 2008;39:2712-2719.

6. van den Berg E, Geerlings MI, Biessels GJ, Nederkoorn PJ, Kloppenborg RP. White matter hyperintensities and cognition in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease: a domain-specific meta-analysis. J Alzheimers Dis 2018;63:515-527.

7. Silbert LC, Nelson C, Howieson DB, Moore MM, Kaye JA. Impact of white matter hyperintensity volume progression on rate of cognitive and motor decline. Neurology 2008;71:108-113.

8. Herrmann LL, Le Masurier M, Ebmeier KP. White matter hyperintensities in late life depression: a systematic review. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008;79:619-624.

9. The LADIS Study Group; Poggesi A, Pantoni L, Inzitari D, Fazekas F, Ferro J, O’Brien J, et al. 2001-2011: a decade of the LADIS (Leukoaraiosis And DISability) study: what have we learned about white matter changes and small-vessel disease? Cerebrovasc Dis 2011;32:577-588.

10. Rosario BL, Rosso AL, Aizenstein HJ, Harris T, Newman AB, Satterfield S, et al. Cerebral white matter and slow gait: contribution of hyperintensities and normal-appearing parenchyma. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2016;71:968-973.

11. Vernooij MW, Smits M. Structural neuroimaging in aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2012;22:33-55. vii-viii.

12. Schmidt R, Schmidt H, Haybaeck J, Loitfelder M, Weis S, Cavalieri M, et al. Heterogeneity in age-related white matter changes. Acta Neuropathol 2011;122:171-185.

13. Kim KW, MacFall JR, Payne ME. Classification of white matter lesions on magnetic resonance imaging in elderly persons. Biol Psychiatry 2008;64:273-280.

14. Fazekas F, Kapeller P, Schmidt R, Offenbacher H, Payer F, Fazekas G. The relation of cerebral magnetic resonance signal hyperintensities to Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurol Sci 1996;142:121-125.

15. Fassbender K, Mielke O, Bertsch T, Nafe B, Fröschen S, Hennerici M. Homocysteine in cerebral macroangiography and microangiopathy. Lancet 1999;353:1586-1587.

16. Minter MR, Taylor JM, Crack PJ. The contribution of neuroinflammation to amyloid toxicity in Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurochem 2016;136:457-474.

17. Salvadores N, Gerónimo-Olvera C, Court FA. Axonal degeneration in AD: the contribution of Aβ and tau. Front Aging Neurosci 2020;12:581767

18. Garnier-Crussard A, Bougacha S, Wirth M, Dautricourt S, Sherif S, Landeau B, et al. White matter hyperintensity topography in Alzheimer’s disease and links to cognition. Alzheimers Dement 2022;18:422-433.

19. Alban SL, Lynch KM, Ringman JM, Toga AW, Chui HC, Sepehrband F, et al. The association between white matter hyperintensities and amyloid and tau deposition. Neuroimage Clin 2023;38:103383

20. McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, Hyman BT, Jack CR Jr, Kawas CH, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 2011;7:263-269.

21. Lee JH, Lee KU, Lee DY, Kim KW, Jhoo JH, Kim JH, et al. Development of the Korean version of the consortium to establish a registry for Alzheimer’s Disease assessment packet (CERAD-K): clinical and neuropsychological assessment batteries. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2002;57:P47-P53.

22. Fischl B. FreeSurfer. Neuroimage 2012;62:774-781.

23. Schmidt P. Bayesian inference for structured additive regression models for large-scale problems with applications to medical imaging [dissertation]. München, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München. 2017.

24. Wenham PR, Price WH, Blandell G. Apolipoprotein E genotyping by one-stage PCR. Lancet 1991;337:1158-1159.

25. Lesher EL, Berryhill JS. Validation of the geriatric depression scale-short form among inpatients. J Clin Psychol 1994;50:256-260.

26. Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, Gold J. Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:1245-1251.

27. Hersi M, Irvine B, Gupta P, Gomes J, Birkett N, Krewski D. Risk factors associated with the onset and progression of Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review of the evidence. Neurotoxicology 2017;61:143-187.

28. Riedel BC, Thompson PM, Brinton RD. Age, APOE and sex: triad of risk of Alzheimer’s disease. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2016;160:134-147.

29. Heo JH, Lee ST, Chu K, Park HJ, Shim JY, Kim M. White matter hyperintensities and cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer disease. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 2009;22:207-212.

30. van der Vlies AE, Staekenborg SS, Admiraal-Behloul F, Prins ND, Barkhof F, Vrenken H, et al. Associations between magnetic resonance imaging measures and neuropsychological impairment in early and late onset Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2013;35:169-178.

31. Basile AM, Pantoni L, Pracucci G, Asplund K, Chabriat H, Erkinjuntti T, et al. Age, hypertension, and lacunar stroke are the major determinants of the severity of age-related white matter changes: the LADIS (leukoaraiosis and disability in the elderly) study. Cerebrovasc Dis 2006;21:315-322.

32. Kloppenborg RP, Nederkoorn PJ, Geerlings MI, van den Berg E. Presence and progression of white matter hyperintensities and cognition: a meta-analysis. Neurology 2014;82:2127-2138.

33. Alber J, Alladi S, Bae HJ, Barton DA, Beckett LA, Bell JM, et al. White matter hyperintensities in vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID): knowledge gaps and opportunities. Alzheimers Dement (N Y) 2019;5:107-117.

34. Prins ND, van Dijk EJ, den Heijer T, Vermeer SE, Jolles J, Koudstaal PJ, et al. Cerebral small-vessel disease and decline in information processing speed, executive function and memory. Brain 2005;128(Pt 9):2034-2041.

35. Smith EE, Salat DH, Jeng J, McCreary CR, Fischl B, Schmahmann JD, et al. Correlations between MRI white matter lesion location and executive function and episodic memory. Neurology 2011;76:1492-1499.

36. Yamanaka T, Uchida Y, Sakurai K, Kato D, Mizuno M, Sato T, et al. Anatomical links between white matter hyperintensity and medial temporal atrophy reveal impairment of executive functions. Aging Dis 2019;10:711-718.

37. Junqué C, Pujol J, Vendrell P, Bruna O, Jódar M, Ribas JC, et al. Leukoaraiosis on magnetic resonance imaging and speed of mental processing. Arch Neurol 1990;47:151-156.

38. Ylikoski R, Ylikoski A, Erkinjuntti T, Sulkava R, Raininko R, Tilvis R. White matter changes in healthy elderly persons correlate with attention and speed of mental processing. Arch Neurol 1993;50:818-824.

39. van der Flier WM, Middelkoop HA, Weverling-Rijnsburger AW, Admiraal-Behloul F, Bollen EL, Westendorp RG, et al. Neuropsychological correlates of MRI measures in the continuum of cognitive decline at old age. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2005;20:82-88.

40. Park JH, Lee SB, Lee JJ, Yoon JC, Han JW, Kim TH, et al. Depression plays a moderating role in the cognitive decline associated with changes of brain white matter hyperintensities. J Clin Psychiatry 2018;79:17m11763

41. Shim YS, Youn YC, Na DL, Kim SY, Cheong HK, Moon SY, et al. Effects of medial temporal atrophy and white matter hyperintensities on the cognitive functions in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Eur Neurol 2011;66:75-82.

42. van der Flier WM, van Straaten EC, Barkhof F, Verdelho A, Madureira S, Pantoni L, et al. Small vessel disease and general cognitive function in nondisabled elderly: the LADIS study. Stroke 2005;36:2116-2120.

43. Legdeur N, Visser PJ, Woodworth DC, Muller M, Fletcher E, Maillard P, et al. White matter hyperintensities and hippocampal atrophy in relation to cognition: the 90+ study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2019;67:1827-1834.

44. Tullberg M, Fletcher E, DeCarli C, Mungas D, Reed BR, Harvey DJ, et al. White matter lesions impair frontal lobe function regardless of their location. Neurology 2004;63:246-253.

45. Schmahmann JD, Smith EE, Eichler FS, Filley CM. Cerebral white matter: neuroanatomy, clinical neurology, and neurobehavioral correlates. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2008;1142:266-309.