TABLE 1.

Selected quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies where entorhinal cortex was used for the classification of AD and the prediction of conversion from MCI to AD.

Author	Data type	Classification	ROI	Acc.	Se.	Sp.	Description
Classification studies
Juottonen et al. (1999)	Volume	NC vs. AD	Hip. Erc.	86% 87%	80% 80%	91% 94%	Both hippocampus and entorhinal cortex had the same discriminative power.
Pennanen et al. (2004)	Volume	NC vs. MCI	Hip. Erc.	60% 66%	57% 65%	62% 70%	Between NC and MCI subjects entorhinal cortex atrophy was more pronounced and provided better classification.
Ryu et al. (2017)	Volume	SMI vs. NC	Hip Erc.	NA	67% 78%	85% 93%	Subjects with SMI had lower Erc. volumes than NC, whereas no differences in Hip volume were seen
Prediction of conversion from MCI to AD
Killiany et al. (2002)	Volume	0 vs. 36 months	Hip. Erc.	NA 84%	NA	NA	Entorhinal cortex differentiated MCI subjects that developed AD, whereas hippocampus did not
deToledo-Morrell et al. (2004)	Volume	0 vs. 36 months	Hip. Erc.	NA 93%	NA	NA	Entorhinal cortex provided better predictive accuracy from hippocampus
Devanand et al. (2007)	Volume	0 vs. 36 months	Hip. Erc.	79% 80%	61% 63%	NA	Entorhinal cortex had more atrophy rates than hippocampus for MCIc
Bakkour et al. (2009)	Thickness	0 vs. 36 months	Cortex	NA	83%	65%	Entorhinal cortex volume may be a better predictor in people with MCI rather than hippocampal volume
Eskildsen et al. (2013)	Thickness	0 vs. 36 months	Cortex	67%–76%	NA	NA	Longitudinal measures in MCI subjects showed that entorhinal cortex was affected first, followed by hippocampus

SMI, subjective memory impairment; NC, normal controls; MCI, mild cognitive impairment; MCIc, mild cognitive impairment converter; AD, Alzheimer’s disease; ROI, region of interest; Acc., accuracy; Se, sensitivity; Sp, specificity.