Location matters: Attributing cognitive symptoms to white matter hyperintensities in 3,481 memory clinic patients.

Authors

Ewoud J van der Lelij, Mirthe Coenen, Floor A S de Kort, Hugo J Kuijf, Frederik Barkhof, Josephine Barnes, Esther van den Berg, Thomas Benke, Christopher P L H Chen, Peter Dal-Bianco, Charles DeCarli, Marco Duering, Christian Enzinger, Michael Ewers, Lieza G Exalto, Nicolai Franzmeier, Saima Hilal, Edith Hofer, Huiberdina L Koek, Pauline Maillard, Cheryl R McCreary, Henk Mutsaerts, Janne M Papma, Ross W Paterson, Jonathan M Schott, Ming Ann Sim, Catherine F Slattery, Eric E Smith, Carole H Sudre, Betty M Tijms, Narayanaswamy Venketasubramanian, Meike Willemijn Vernooij, Everard Vijverberg, Frank Wolters, Xu Xin, J Matthijs Biesbroek, Alberto De Luca, Geert-Jan Biessels

Published in

Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders. Pages 1. Oct 19, 2026. Epub Oct 19, 2026.

Abstract

In memory clinic patients, assessing diagnostic relevance of white matter hyperintensities (WMHs), as a marker to explain cognitive deficits, can be challenging. Here, we aimed to quantify this relevance by measuring the variance in cognitive function they explain, and consider, beyond total WMH volume, WMH location in specific tracts and normative WMH values.
We analyzed previously pooled and harmonized individual patient data (n=3,481, 71±9 years old, 50% females) from 11 international memory clinic cohorts from the Meta-VCI-Map consortium. Cognitive function was assessed in 4 domains: attention and executive function, information processing speed, verbal memory and language. We measured WMH volumes in 20 white matter tracts. These were also norm-adjusted for age and sex, using normative WMH values from 14,876 community-dwelling individuals. Explained variance in cognitive function was measured for demographics only (age, sex and education) and demographics combined with total WMH volume, tract-specific WMH volumes and norm-adjusted and tract-specific WMH z-scores.
Beyond demographics, total and tract-specific WMH volumes explained significantly more variance in attention and executive functioning (ΔR2total=3.7%, 95%CI=[3.3%;4.1%], ΔR2tracts=6.2%, 95%CI=[5.6%;6.7%]) and verbal memory (ΔR2total=3.6%, 95%CI=[3.2%;3.9%], ΔR2tracts=8.0%, 95%CI=[7.5%;8.6%]). In processing speed, tract-specific (ΔR2=2.5%, 95%CI=[2.1%;3.0%]) -but not total- WMH volumes explained more variance than demographics. Norm-adjusting tract-specific volumes explained no additional variance.
Considering location of WMHs increased their diagnostic relevance, compared to total volume, explaining more variance in attention and executive function, processing speed and verbal memory. This advocates considering WMH location beyond total volume as a diagnostic marker.

PMID:
42895925
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 20 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.