Sign in
NeurosciencebioRxiv
Preprint

More than half of the variance in in-vivo 1H-MRS metabolite estimates is common to all metabolites

James J. PrisciandaroiD, Helge J. ZöllneriD, Saipavitra Murali‐ManohariD, Georg OeltzschneriD, Richard A.E. EddeniD

Abstract

The present study characterized associations among brain metabolite levels, applying bivariate and multivariate (i.e., factor analysis) statistical methods to tCr-referenced estimates of the major PRESS 1H-MRS metabolites (i.e., tNAA/tCr, tCho/tCr, mI/tCr, Glx/tCr), acquired from medial parietal lobe in a large (n=299), well-characterized international cohort of healthy volunteers (Povazan et al., 2020). Results supported the hypothesis that 1H-MRS-measured metabolite estimates are moderately intercorrelated (Mr = 0.42, SDr = 0.11, ps < 0.001), with more than half (i.e., 57%) of the total variability in metabolite estimates common to (i.e., shared by) all metabolites. Older age was significantly associated with lower levels of common metabolite variance (CMV; {beta} = -0.09, p = 0.048), despite not being associated with levels of any individual metabolite. Holding CMV levels constant, females had significantly lower levels of total choline (i.e., unique metabolite variance or UMV; {beta} = -0.19, p < 0.001), mirroring significant bivariate correlations between sex and total choline reported previously. If replicated, these results would suggest that applied 1H-MRS researchers should shift their analytical framework from examining bivariate associations between individual metabolites and specialty-dependent (e.g., clinical, research) variables of interest (e.g., using t-tests) to examining multi-variable (i.e., covariate) associations between multiple metabolites and specialty-dependent variables of interest (e.g., using multiple regression). Without this shift, clear interpretation of associations of 1H-MRS metabolites with specialty-dependent variables of interest may not be possible.

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISLind '20Gong '22Thomson '23Wang '23Murali‐Mano '25Perdue '23
65% semantic matchNeuroscience
Anna Lind, Carl‐Johan Boraxbekk, Esben Thade Petersen+3 more·Journal of Neuroscience·Sep 29, 2020· 73 citations