TABLE 1.
Case | Age at death | Gender | PMIa | Braak stageb | Tangle scoresc |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
years | h | ||||
AD 1d | 89 | F | 3.0 | V | 14.5 |
AD 2d | 80 | F | 2.25 | VI | 14.5 |
AD 3 | 85 | F | 1.66 | V | 12.0 |
AD 4d | 78 | F | 1.83 | VI | 15.0 |
AD 5d | 95 | F | 3.16 | VI | 10.0 |
AD 6d | 86 | M | 2.25 | VI | 13.5 |
AD 7d | 91 | F | 3.0 | V | 8.50 |
AD 8 | 83 | F | 3.0 | VI | 12.4 |
AD 9 | 74 | M | 2.75 | VI | 14.66 |
AD 10 | 79 | F | 1.5 | VI | 14.66 |
AD 11 | 73 | F | 2.0 | V | 15.00 |
AD 12 | 81 | M | 3.0 | V | 11.00 |
AD 13 | 76 | M | 2.33 | VI | 15.00 |
AD 14 | 72 | M | 2.5 | VI | 15.00 |
AD 15 | 74 | F | 2.83 | VI | 15.00 |
AD 16 | 76 | M | 4.0 | V | 15.00 |
AD 17 | 78 | M | 1.83 | VI | 15.00 |
Mean ± S.D. | 80.59 ± 6.70 | 2.52 ± 0.65 | 13.57 ± 2.05 | ||
Con 1 | 85 | F | 2.75 | II | 5.0 |
Con 2 | 82 | F | 2.0 | II | 4.25 |
Con 3 | 70 | F | 2.0 | I | 0.00 |
Con 4 | 73 | M | 2.0 | III | 2.75 |
Con 5 | 78 | M | 1.66 | I | 0.00 |
Con 6 | 80 | M | 3.25 | I | 2.75 |
Con 7 | 80 | M | 2.16 | II | 1.00 |
Con 8 | 83 | F | 3.25 | I | 0.75 |
Con 9 | 82 | F | 2.25 | II | 3.50 |
Con 10d | 85 | M | 2.5 | II | 4.25 |
Con 11d | 86 | F | 2.5 | III | 5.00 |
Con 12d | 81 | M | 2.75 | III | 6.41 |
Con 13d | 88 | F | 3.0 | II | 2.00 |
Con 14d | 90 | F | 3.0 | III | 4.50 |
Con 15d | 88 | F | 3.5 | III | 2.50 |
Con 16d | 88 | F | 3.0 | IV | 4.50 |
Mean ± S.D. | 82.44 ± 5.50 | 2.60 ± 0.55 | 3.07 ± 1.93 |
a Post-mortem interval.
b Neurofibrillary pathology was staged according to Braak and Braak (88).
c Tangle score was a density estimate and was designated as none, sparse, moderate, or frequent (0, 1, 2, or 3 for statistics), as defined according to CERAD Alzheimer disease criteria (89). Five areas (frontal, temporal, parietal, hippocampal, and entorhinal) were examined, and the scores were combined for a maximum of 15.
d Both frontal and temporal cortex.