Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

The impact of brain iron accumulation on cognition: A systematic review

  • Holly Spence ,

    Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Project administration, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    h.spence.19@abdn.ac.uk

    Affiliation Aberdeen Biomedical Imaging Centre, Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom

  • Chris J. McNeil,

    Roles Conceptualization, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Aberdeen Biomedical Imaging Centre, Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom

  • Gordon D. Waiter

    Roles Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Aberdeen Biomedical Imaging Centre, Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom

Abstract

Iron is involved in many processes in the brain including, myelin generation, mitochondrial function, synthesis of ATP and DNA and the cycling of neurotransmitters. Disruption of normal iron homeostasis can result in iron accumulation in the brain, which in turn can partake in interactions which amplify oxidative damage. The development of MRI techniques for quantifying brain iron has allowed for the characterisation of the impact that brain iron has on cognition and neurodegeneration. This review uses a systematic approach to collate and evaluate the current literature which explores the relationship between brain iron and cognition. The following databases were searched in keeping with a predetermined inclusion criterion: Embase Ovid, PubMed and PsychInfo (from inception to 31st March 2020). The included studies were assessed for study characteristics and quality and their results were extracted and summarised. This review identified 41 human studies of varying design, which statistically assessed the relationship between brain iron and cognition. The most consistently reported interactions were in the Caudate nuclei, where increasing iron correlated poorer memory and general cognitive performance in adulthood. There were also consistent reports of a correlation between increased Hippocampal and Thalamic iron and poorer memory performance, as well as, between iron in the Putamen and Globus Pallidus and general cognition. We conclude that there is consistent evidence that brain iron is detrimental to cognitive health, however, more longitudinal studies will be required to fully understand this relationship and to determine whether iron occurs as a primary cause or secondary effect of cognitive decline.

Introduction

Iron has many biological roles including the cycling of neurotransmitters, enzyme and mitochondrial function, ATP and DNA synthesis and myelin generation [14]. In the healthy human adult brain, the total concentration of iron is around 0–200μg per gram of tissue, typically being lower in the White Matter (WM) and cortical Grey Matter (GM) (<60 μg per gram) [2]. 90% of brain iron is stored in ferritin with only 0.05% of brain iron being present in the labile iron pool [5]. In healthy aging, iron accumulates heterogeneously in specific regions of the brain, bound mainly to ferritin and neuromelanin [6] and largely located in the deep GM nuclei [710]. There is a rapid increase in iron accumulation (different depending on brain region) from birth up until around 20 years old, at which point the accumulation rate slows in some regions, reaching a plateau in middle age and increasing again after 60 years old [1, 7]. Due to this relationship with age, brain iron has been the focus of many studies finding associations between regional brain iron levels and age-related cognitive decline, as well as several neurodegenerative diseases [4, 6].

Several theories as to the role of brain iron in cognitive decline have been suggested. Many of these mechanisms revolve around the ability of iron to induce oxidative stress via Fenton’s reaction [11]. During Fenton’s reaction, excess iron reacts with reactive oxygen species (ROS), such as hydrogen peroxide to produce highly reactive OH˙ radicals which can in turn induce iron release from mitochondrial iron-sulphur cluster proteins and iron storage proteins. Released iron can then undergo Fenton’s reaction, amplifying ROS generation [6, 12]. When ROS and free radicals generated via Fenton’s reaction exceed the antioxidant capacity of brain cells, oxidative stress is induced leading to loss of DNA integrity, lipid peroxidation, mitochondrial dysfunction, protein misfolding and ultimately neuronal cell death. This oxidative stress is thought to be exacerbated by the induction of neuroinflammation. Upregulation of HO-1 in glia is also thought to contribute to neurodegeneration as prolonged action may be involved in iron sequestration, intracellular stress and mitochondrial insufficiency [6, 1315]. Another potential mechanism by which brain iron levels could influence cognitive decline/neurodegeneration is Ferroptosis. This is an iron-dependent necrosis mechanism which is characterised by shrunken mitochondria with increased density and outer membrane rupture [16].

In terms of the mechanism by which iron accumulates, it has been shown in several studies that participants with Parkinson’s disease (PD) have an increased permeability of the blood brain barrier (BBB) and upregulation of iron transporters such as Lactotransferrin [5, 12, 17]. This would allow for the increased uptake of iron into the brain and may account for the increase of iron accumulation in the brain in neurodegenerative disease. Furthermore, in diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD), PD and prion disease, iron is shown to associate with protein aggregates and in the case of Amyloid beta, it is thought that iron plays a role in the toxicity of these protein aggregates [1820]. Although these theories have been proposed, the full extent of the role of iron in cognitive decline and neurodegeneration remains unclear.

Although iron status measurement has been possible for many years, the emergence of novel techniques in magnetic resonance imaging have allowed for the specific, non-invasive measurement of brain iron. Techniques such as Susceptibility Weighted Imaging (SWI), R2* relaxation time and Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) make use of the magnetic properties of iron in order to map the spatial distribution of iron in the brain from magnitude and phase images [21]. QSM is considered the most sensitive and specific technique for measuring iron in the brain non-invasively [22] and the ability of QSM to accurately measure brain iron has been validated in several post-mortem studies [23, 24]. It is hoped that such measures of brain iron will allow for further elucidation of the brain iron accumulation patterns and their relationship with cognitive decline and neurodegeneration.

This review will discuss the relationships between brain iron and cognition elucidated in human studies across a wide age range; in healthy adults as well as, in individuals with diseases including PD, AD, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with cognitive impairment, mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Multiple Sclerosis (MS). We aim to present the current understanding of regional brain iron accumulation patterns and their relation to cognitive performance outcomes, in order to gain a greater understanding of the potential mechanisms underlying this iron-cognition relationship. We hypothesise that age-related regional increase in brain iron levels will correlate with impairment of specific regional cognitive function.

Methods

The PRISMA statement recommendations for systematic review were followed in this systematic review in order to provide high quality reporting [25, 26].

Information sources and eligibility criteria

A systematic electronic search strategy was generated at the start of this study. Electronic searching was carried out on 31st March 2020 using the following electronic databases: Embase Ovid (1974–31 March 2020), PubMed (Inception– 31 March 2020) and Psych Info (1806–31 March 2020). Studies were assessed for adherence to pre-determined inclusion/exclusion criteria detailed below.

Inclusion criteria

Studies were included in this review if they reported on the following:

  1. Human Studies measuring Brain iron level AND cognition
  2. Statistical comparison of brain iron and cognitive performance
  3. Published in English Language AND the full text was available

Exclusion criteria

Studies were excluded from this review if they were:

  1. Animal studies
  2. Measuring only systemic iron status (no measure of brain specific iron levels)
  3. Single case studies, Reviews, protocols editorials or conference abstract
  4. Studies investigating effects of maternal iron on offspring cognition

Search strategy

The full search strategies used for this review are detailed in Table 1.

Study selection

All studies found in the electronic search were assessed for their eligibility for inclusion in this review by Holly Spence. Studies were included if they met all the inclusion criteria and included studies had their referenced papers reviewed for eligibility for inclusion. The included studies ultimately consisted of published articles and theses only.

Synthesis of results

The following study characteristics were extracted from each study for assessment of study quality and study comparison: Number of participants; participant gender ratio; participant average age; type of study design; measures of cognition used; measures of brain iron used; statistical methods used. Results which were statistically significant (p<0.05) were extracted and summarised from each study.

Quality assessment

Each study which satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria was assessed for quality via a 10-point based system using the following 10 criteria: (1) Does the study have a clearly defined research objective? (2) Does the study adequately describe the inclusion/exclusion criteria? (3) Is the sample size adequate? (4) Does the study report on the population parameters/demographics? (5) Does the study report detail on appropriate assessment of Cognition? (6) Does the study report detail of the assessment of iron? (7) Does the study provide an appropriate control group? (8) Does the study apply the appropriate statistical analyses? (9) Does the study adequately report the strength of results? (10) Do the authors report on the limitations of their study?

Results

Study selection

The electronic search of Embase Ovid, PubMed and PsychInfo yielded 643 citations in total. After duplicates were removed, 411 studies remained for screening. Once these studies were screened, 141 non-human studies were excluded, 4 papers were excluded due to being unavailable in English and 106 reviews, editorials and conference abstracts were removed. In total 6 studies were excluded due to being single case studies, 60 were excluded for not measuring brain iron and 6 were excluded for not measuring cognition. Finally, 24 studies did not assess statistically the relationship between iron and cognition and so were excluded, as well as 3 studies which measured only the effects of maternal iron on offspring cognition. A total of 28 studies remained for reference screening. After references were reviewed, a further 13 eligible studies were obtained. A total of 41 studies were therefore included in this review. The full details of the study selection process are outlined in Fig 1.

thumbnail
Fig 1. Flowchart detailing the study selection procedure.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240697.g001

Study characteristics

Study characteristics were collated and are presented in Tables 2 and 3; with Table 2 presenting details on overall study design and Table 3 presenting details on participants and study groups

Quality assessment

All included studies were assessed for quality using a 10-point-based scoring system and each score was converted to a % Quality Score (QS). The quality scores for all studies can be seen in Table 4. 26 of the 41 assessed studies were of high quality (QS>90%), 14 were of very good quality (QS of 80%-90%) and 1 study was of good quality (QS of 70%-80%).

Summary of results

The key findings relating to the brain iron-cognition relationship were extracted from each study in this review and are summarised in Table 5. 11 of the reviewed papers showed a significant relationship between whole brain iron concentration and measures of cognition (including memory, general intelligence, visual performance, processing speed, social cognition and BOLD modulation). Every other study reviewed reported significant associations between iron levels in specific brain regions and individual measures of cognition, as presented in Fig 2.

thumbnail
Fig 2. Regional associations between iron and cognition.

Figure presents number of studies reporting significant association (p<0.05) between regional iron and cognition measures. *Pallidum had associations between regional iron and memory in one study [30] but had association in all cognitive measures except memory in a second study [42].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240697.g002

Discussion

Summary of evidence

This review analysed human studies in which brain iron and cognition were measured and their relationship assessed statistically. Many of studies assessed reported a significant relationship between total brain iron and general cognitive performance and many links between regional iron levels and specific measures of cognition were also reported. Memory function was the most frequently reported cognitive measure to be correlated with brain iron, however, this was the most frequently assessed cognitive outcome. Regions where iron was most frequently reported to correlate with memory performance were the Caudate nuclei, Hippocampus and Thalamus. All other regions were also associated with memory in at least one study except for the Globus Pallidus where regional iron had no reported associations with memory. The associations between the caudate, hippocampus and thalamus iron and memory are somewhat unsurprising as each of these regions are known to be involved in different facets of memory function [6769] and so it is plausible that disruption of these circuits via iron accumulation would confer memory dysfunction. The efficacy of interactions between the caudate and hippocampus in memory function has been associated with availability of dopamine receptors [70, 71], which has in turn been proposed as having a potential role in iron accumulation [72]. Studies have suggested that iron and dopamine can interact to induce oxidative stress and neurodegeneration by forming a toxic couple [72]. Animal studies have also demonstrated that iron deficient mice and rats show decreased dopamine transporter and receptor levels and general dopaminergic dysfunction [73, 74]. This suggests that with an increase iron, there could be an increase in dopamine receptors and transporters, enhancing toxic coupling between iron and dopamine and thus increasing neurodegeneration in dopamine rich regions, however, this requires further investigation.

Furthermore, higher iron levels in the caudate nuclei were also consistently reported to correlate to poorer general cognitive performance. However, the putamen had the most reported associations with general cognition, with the Globus Pallidus and the Substantia Nigra also being associated with general cognition in more than one study. The putamen has roles in many different neurological functions such as, sensory and motor information processing, learning and language [7577]. This could explain the consistency of reports that iron accumulation here is associated with poorer general cognitive performance, further suggesting that iron accumulation causes atrophy which leads to a localised disruption of function.

Although assessed in less of the studies reviewed, there were associations between reduced motor function and increased striatal iron content, as well as, increased iron in the Putamen and increased disability scores, such as, Dementia rating scale, Extended disability status score and the UPDRS-III for rating of Parkinson’s pathology. Due to its many neurological roles and connections, atrophy in the Putamen is known to be involved in pathology of several diseases such as, Parkinson’s disease, Multiple Sclerosis and Dementia with Lewy Bodies [7881]. The striatum consists of the caudate and putamen and is crucial for connections to the basal ganglia which is heavily involved in motor control [82]. These associations therefore suggest that iron accumulation is capable of either causing atrophy or is accompanied by atrophy, which in turn causes regional damage that can interfere with circuitry in the brain. This is in line with the findings of several of the included studies that increases in regional brain iron were strongly associated with regional volume decrease [34, 35, 49, 54], suggesting that brain iron increase is correlated with atrophy.

Whilst not evaluated in the included studies, differences in iron status have been observed between sexes particularly during development. Larsen et al. observed these differences in their 2020 study, which determined that male brain iron levels plateau at an earlier age than in females in some brain regions. Due to this later plateau during development females generally begin adulthood with higher brain iron levels than men. However, at older age, females are shown to have generally lower iron stores in some brain regions than males, potentially due to menstruation [8385]. Female brain iron deficit mediated by menstruation would however, be highly variable, dependent on the characteristics of an individuals’ menstruation (i.e. menstruation pattern, heaviness of blood loss etc.) [83]. This may put females at a lower risk of brain iron-mediated cognitive impairment, however the effects of sex-mediated brain iron on cognition have not been extensively studied.

All studies included in this review controlled for sex during their analyses. Fifteen of the included studies assessed sex-mediated brain iron differences statistically; 1 study found that while temporal iron levels did not significantly differ between men and women, cerebellar iron was significantly higher in males compared to females [27]; 1 studies found significantly higher hippocampal iron in men compared to women [28]; 1 study found that regional brain iron in women plateaus later than in men during development [1] and the remaining 12 studies observed no significant difference in brain iron in any assessed region between males and females [29, 31, 3436, 38, 42, 44, 47, 51, 54, 63].

Although primarily focusing on the associations between brain iron and cognition, some of the papers reviewed did provide insight into potential mechanisms for this relationship. It has been previously reported that iron in the brain tends to localise to protein aggregates and some studies have shown that iron plays a role in the toxicity of some of these aggregates [8689]. In fact, when amyloid β (Aβ) is complexed with iron it can induce ROS via Fenton’s reaction leading to oxidative stress and activation of the Bcl-2 apoptotic pathway [18, 19]. Iron has also been shown to localise with protein aggregates such as tau and amyloid beta in animal models for AD and PD [88, 90, 91]. Several of the studies included in this review reported that iron was localised to Aβ plaques and neurofibrillary tangles [27, 58]. A study by Ayton et al. [27], included in this review, found that brain iron level mediated 17% of the effect of Neurofibrillary tangles on cognitive performance. This, taken with the afore mentioned literature, suggests that iron could amplify neurodegenerative processes such as protein misfolding, rather than being a primary cause or effect of disease.

Limitations

Whilst this article was able to provide a comprehensive review of the literature investigating the relationship between brain iron and cognition, there were several limitations to this study. Firstly, there was a wide variety of methods for measuring both brain iron and cognition and this must be considered when comparing the included studies. Secondly, although a thorough search of the literature was conducted, it is possible that relevant studies were missed and thus not included. Furthermore, all included studies were published articles or theses and thus there is an element of publication bias in this review that must be considered. Additionally, some of the studies included in this review had relatively small sample sizes which may reduce the power of some of the conclusions made. The participants all bar one of the studies in this review were adults and so the findings cannot be applied to children or adolescents. Finally, the potential mechanisms by which iron accumulation in the brain could cause cognitive dysfunction were not assessed in this review and remain unclear.

Conclusions

To conclude, this review has investigated the effects of brain iron on aspects of cognition. There is consistent evidence in the studies reviewed that in adulthood, an increase in brain iron had a detrimental effect on cognitive ability. However, it seems that iron accumulates heterogeneously across brain regions and when only some regions have high iron, their specific function can be impaired. In this way, increased iron in the Caudate nuclei, Hippocampus and Thalamus is consistently reported to correlate to poorer memory performance; whereas, increased iron in the putamen was more consistently reported to correlate to poorer general cognition. These findings strongly suggest an effect of brain iron on cognition and this relationship should therefore be investigated further. Going forward, it is important to determine whether iron is a primary cause of brain atrophy or whether brain iron accumulation is a secondary effect of brain atrophy. Regardless of the mechanisms underlying the relationship between brain iron and cognition, MRI techniques for quantifying brain iron therefore show promise as a potential non-invasive biomarker for age-related cognitive decline.

Supporting information

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Roland Sutton Academic Trust for their financial support.

References

  1. 1. Larsen B, Bourque J, Moore TM, Adebimpe A, Calkins ME, Elliott MA, et al. Longitudinal development of brain iron is linked to cognition in youth. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2020 Jan 27;40(9):1810–8. pmid:31988059
  2. 2. Duyn JH, Schenck J. Contributions to magnetic susceptibility of brain tissue. NMR in Biomedicine. 2017;30(4).
  3. 3. White AR, Kanninen KM, Crouch PJ. Editorial: Metals and neurodegeneration: Restoring the balance. Vol. 7, Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. Frontiers Research Foundation; 2015. p. 127. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2015.00127 pmid:26191002
  4. 4. Hare D, Ayton S, Bush A, Lei P. A delicate balance: Iron metabolism and diseases of the brain. Vol. 5, Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. 2013. p. 1–19. pmid:23430962
  5. 5. Hadzhieva M, Kirches E, Mawrin C. Review: Iron metabolism and the role of iron in neurodegenerative disorders. Vol. 40, Neuropathology and Applied Neurobiology. Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2014. p. 240–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/nan.12096 pmid:24164678
  6. 6. Ward RJ, Zucca FA, Duyn JH, Crichton RR, Zecca L. The role of iron in brain ageing and neurodegenerative disorders. Vol. 13, The Lancet Neurology. Lancet Publishing Group; 2014. p. 1045–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70117-6 pmid:25231526
  7. 7. Deistung A, Schweser F, Reichenbach JR. Overview of quantitative susceptibility mapping. NMR in Biomedicine. 2017;30:e3569.
  8. 8. Haacke EM, Liu S, Buch S, Zheng W, Wu D, Ye Y. Quantitative susceptibility mapping: Current status and future directions. Vol. 33, Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Elsevier Inc.; 2015. p. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2014.09.004 pmid:25267705
  9. 9. Li W, Wu B, Batrachenko A, Bancroft-Wu V, Morey RA, Shashi V, et al. Differential developmental trajectories of magnetic susceptibility in human brain gray and white matter over the lifespan. Human Brain Mapping. 2014;35(6):2698–713. pmid:24038837
  10. 10. Liu C, Li W, Tong KA, Yeom KW, Kuzminski S. Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging and Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping in the Brain HHS Public Access. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;42(1):23–41. pmid:25270052
  11. 11. Winterbourn CC. Toxicity of iron and hydrogen peroxide: the Fenton reaction. Toxicology Letters. 1995;82–83(C):969–74.
  12. 12. Abadin H, Bartzokis G, Bayer T, Brown D, Bush A, Chang C, et al. Metal Ions in Life Sciences: Neurodegenerative Diseases and Metal Ions. 1st ed. Sigel A, Sigel H, Sigel R, editors. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd; 2006.
  13. 13. Schipper HM, Song W, Zukor H, Hascalovici JR, Zeligman D. Heme oxygenase-1 and neurodegeneration: Expanding frontiers of engagement. Journal of Neurochemistry. 2009;110(2):469–85. pmid:19457088
  14. 14. Loboda A, Damulewicz M, Pyza E, Jozkowicz A, Dulak J. Role of Nrf2/HO-1 system in development, oxidative stress response and diseases: an evolutionarily conserved mechanism. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences. 2016;73(17):3221–47. pmid:27100828
  15. 15. Poon HF, Calabrese V, Scapagnini G, Butterfield DA. Free Radicals: Key to Brain Aging and Heme Oxygenase as a Cellular Response to Oxidative Stress. The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2004;59(5):M478–93.
  16. 16. Wang ZB, Liu JY, Xu XJ, Mao XY, Zhang W, Zhou HH, et al. Neurodegeneration with brain iron accumulation: Insights into the mitochondria dysregulation. Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy [Internet]. 2019;118:109068. Available from: pmid:31404774
  17. 17. Gray MT, Woulfe JM. Striatal blood-brain barrier permeability in Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism. 2015;35:747–50. pmid:25757748
  18. 18. Rival T, Page RM, Chandraratna DS, Sendall TJ, Ryder E, Liu B, et al. Fenton chemistry and oxidative stress mediate the toxicity of the -amyloid peptide in a Drosophila model of Alzheimer’s disease. European Journal of Neuroscience. 2009 Apr;29(7):1335–47. pmid:19519625
  19. 19. Kuperstein F, Yavin E. Pro-apoptotic signaling in neuronal cells following iron and amyloid beta peptide neurotoxicity. Journal of Neurochemistry. 2003 Jul;86(1):114–25. pmid:12807431
  20. 20. Wengenack TM, Reyes DA, Curran GL, Borowski BJ, Lin J, Preboske GM, et al. Regional differences in MRI detection of amyloid plaques in AD transgenic mouse brain. NeuroImage. 2011 Jan 1;54(1):113–22. pmid:20728546
  21. 21. Wang Y, Liu T. Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM): Decoding MRI Data for a Tissue Magnetic Biomarker. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2015;73:82–102. pmid:25044035
  22. 22. Barbosa JHO, Santos AC, Tumas V, Liu M, Zheng W, Haacke EM, et al. Quantifying brain iron deposition in patients with Parkinson’s disease using quantitative susceptibility mapping, R2 and R2*. Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2015 Jun 1;33(5):559–65. pmid:25721997
  23. 23. Hallgren B, Sourander P. The effect of age on the non-haemin iron in the human brain. Journal of Neurochemistry. 1958;3(1):41–51. pmid:13611557
  24. 24. Langkammer C, Schweser F, Krebs N, Deistung A, Goessler W, Scheurer E, et al. Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) as a means to measure brain iron? A post mortem validation study. NeuroImage. 2012 Sep;62(3):1593–9. pmid:22634862
  25. 25. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2009;339:b2700.
  26. 26. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ (Online) [Internet]. 2009;339:332–6. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535
  27. 27. Ayton S, Wang Y, Diouf I, Schneider JA, Brockman J, Morris MC, et al. Brain iron is associated with accelerated cognitive decline in people with Alzheimer pathology. Molecular Psychiatry [Internet]. 2019;1–18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-019-0375-7
  28. 28. Bartzokis G, Lu PH, Tingus K, Peters DG, Amar CP, Tishler TA, et al. Gender and iron genes may modify associations between brain iron and memory in healthy aging. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2011 Jun;36(7):1375–84. pmid:21389980
  29. 29. Blasco G, Puig J, Daunis-i-Estadella J, Molina X, Xifra G, Fernández-Aranda F, et al. Brain iron overload, insulin resistance, and cognitive performance in obese subjects: A preliminary MRI case-control study. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(11):3076–83. pmid:25125507
  30. 30. Blasco G, Moreno-Navarrete JM, Rivero M, Pérez-Brocal V, Garre-Olmo J, Puig J, et al. The gut metagenome changes in parallel to waist circumference, brain iron deposition, and cognitive function. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. 2017;102(8):2962–73. pmid:28591831
  31. 31. Carpenter KLH, Li W, Wei H, Wu B, Xiao X, Liu C, et al. Magnetic susceptibility of brain iron is associated with childhood spatial IQ. NeuroImage [Internet]. 2016;132:167–74. Available from: pmid:26899787
  32. 32. Chen BT, Ghassaban K, Jin T, Patel SK, Ye N, Sun C-L, et al. Subcortical brain iron deposition and cognitive performance in older women with or without breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: a pilot MRI study. Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2018;54:218–24. pmid:30076946
  33. 33. Darki F, Nemmi F, Möller A, Sitnikov R, Klingberg T. Quantitative susceptibility mapping of striatum in children and adults, and its association with working memory performance. NeuroImage [Internet]. 2016;136:208–14. Available from: pmid:27132546
  34. 34. Daugherty AM. Accumulation of subcortical iron as a modifier of volumetric and cognitive decline in healthy aging: Two longitudinal studies [Internet]. Wayne State University Dissertations. 2014. Available from: https://manchester.idm.oclc.org/login?url = https://search.proquest.com/docview/1615100570?accountid=12253%0A http://man-fe.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/openurl/44MAN/44MAN_services_page?genre=dissertations+%26+theses&atitle=&author=Daugherty%2C+Ana+M.&volume=&i
  35. 35. Daugherty AM, Haacke EM, Raz N. Striatal iron content predicts its shrinkage and changes in verbal working memory after two years in healthy adults. Journal of Neuroscience. 2015;35(17):6731–43. pmid:25926451
  36. 36. Daugherty AM, Hoagey DA, Kennedy KM, Rodrigue KM. Genetic Predisposition for Inflammation Exacerbates Effects of Striatal Iron Content on Cognitive Switching Ability in Healthy Aging. NeuroImage [Internet]. 2019;185:471–8. Available from: file:///C:/Users/Carla Carolina/Desktop/Artigos para acrescentar na qualificação/The impact of birth weight on cardiovascular disease risk in the.pdf pmid:30395929
  37. 37. Ding B, Chen KM, Ling HW, Sun F, Li X, Wan T, et al. Correlation of iron in the hippocampus with MMSE in patients with alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2009;29:793–8. pmid:19306401
  38. 38. Du L, Zhao Z, Cui A, Zhu Y, Zhang L, Liu J, et al. Increased Iron Deposition on Brain Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping Correlates with Decreased Cognitive Function in Alzheimer’s Disease. ACS Chemical Neuroscience. 2018;9(7):1849–57. pmid:29722955
  39. 39. Fujiwara E, Kmech JA, Cobzas D, Sun H, Seres P, Blevins G, et al. Cognitive implications of deep gray matter iron in multiple sclerosis. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2017;38:942–8. pmid:28232497
  40. 40. Gao L, Jiang Z, Cai Z, Cai M, Zhang Q, Ma Y, et al. Brain iron deposition analysis using susceptibility weighted imaging and its association with body iron level in patients with mild cognitive impairment. Molecular Medicine Reports. 2017;16(6):8209–15. pmid:28990041
  41. 41. Ge Y, Jensen JH, Lu H, Helpern JA, Miles L, Inglese M, et al. Quantitative assessment of iron accumulation in the deep gray matter of multiple sclerosis by magnetic field correlation imaging. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2007;28:1639–44. pmid:17893225
  42. 42. Ghadery C, Pirpamer L, Hofer E, Langkammer C, Petrovic K, Loitfelder M, et al. R2* mapping for brain iron: Associations with cognition in normal aging. Neurobiology of Aging [Internet]. 2015;36(2015):925–32. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2014.09.013
  43. 43. Haller S, Bartsch A, Nguyen D, Rodriguez C, Emch J, Gold G, et al. Cerebral Microhemorrhage and Iron Deposition in Mild Cognitive Impairment. Radiology. 2010;257(3):764–73. pmid:20923870
  44. 44. Hect JL, Daugherty AM, Hermez KM, Thomason ME. Developmental variation in regional brain iron and its relation to cognitive functions in childhood. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience [Internet]. 2018;34:18–26. Available from: pmid:29894887
  45. 45. House MJ, st. Pierre TG, Foster JK, Martins RN, Clarnette R. Quantitative MR imaging R 2 relaxometry in elderly participants reporting memory loss. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2006;27:430–9. pmid:16484425
  46. 46. Kalpouzos G, Garzón B, Sitnikov R, Heiland C, Salami A, Persson J, et al. Higher Striatal Iron Concentration is Linked to Frontostriatal Underactivation and Poorer Memory in Normal Aging. Cerebral Cortex. 2017;27(6):3427–36. pmid:28334149
  47. 47. Li W, Langkammer C, Chou Y-H, Petrovic K, Schmidt R, Song AW, et al. Association between Increased Magnetic Susceptibility of Deep Gray Matter Nuclei and Decreased Motor Function in Healthy Adults. NeuroImage. 2015;105(1):45–52.
  48. 48. Lu L, Cao H, Wei X, Li Y, Li W. Iron Deposition Is Positively Related to Cognitive Impairment in Patients with Chronic Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Assessment with Susceptibility Weighted Imaging. BioMed Research International. 2015;2015(470676):1–7.
  49. 49. Modica CM, Zivadinov R, Dwyer MG, Bergsland N, Weeks AR, Benedict RHB. Iron and volume in the deep gray matter: Association with cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2015;36:57–62. pmid:24948507
  50. 50. Murakami Y, Matsumoto Y, Hoshi K, Ito H, Fuwa TJ, Yamaguchi Y, et al. Rapid increase of “brain-type” transferrin in cerebrospinal fluid after shunt surgery for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: A prognosis marker for cognitive recovery. Journal of Biochemistry. 2018;164(3):205–13. pmid:29701803
  51. 51. Penke L, Valdés Hernandéz MC, Maniega SM, Gow AJ, Murray C, Starr JM, et al. Brain iron deposits are associated with general cognitive ability and cognitive aging. Neurobiology of Aging [Internet]. 2012;33(2012):510–7. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.04.032
  52. 52. Pinter D, Khalil M, Pichler A, Langkammer C, Ropele S, Marschik PB, et al. Predictive value of different conventional and non-conventional MRI-parameters for specific domains of cognitive function in multiple sclerosis. NeuroImage: Clinical [Internet]. 2015;7:715–20. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2015.02.023
  53. 53. Qin Y, Zhu W, Zhan C, Zhao L, Wang J, Tian Q, et al. Investigation on positive correlation of increased brain iron deposition with cognitive impairment in Alzheimer disease by using quantitative MR R2’ mapping. Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology—Medical Science. 2011;31(4):578–85.
  54. 54. Rodrigue KM, Daugherty AM, Haacke EM, Raz N. The role of hippocampal iron concentration and hippocampal volume in age-related differences in memory. Cerebral Cortex. 2013;23:1533–41. pmid:22645251
  55. 55. Rodrigue KM, Daugherty AM, Foster CM, Kennedy KM. Striatal iron content is linked to reduced fronto-striatal brain function under working memory load. NeuroImage [Internet]. 2020;210(2020):116544. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116544
  56. 56. Salami A, Avelar-Pereira B, Garzón B, Sitnikov R, Kalpouzos G. Functional coherence of striatal resting-state networks is modulated by striatal iron content. NeuroImage. 2018;183:495–503. pmid:30125714
  57. 57. Schmalbrock P, Prakash RS, Schirda B, Janssen A, Yang GK, Russell M, et al. Basal ganglia iron in patients with multiple sclerosis measured with 7T quantitative susceptibility mapping correlates with inhibitory control. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2016;37:439–46. pmid:26611996
  58. 58. Smith MA, Zhu X, Tabaton M, Liu G, McKeel DW, Cohen ML, et al. Increased iron and free radical generation in preclinical Alzheimer disease and mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease. 2010;19(1):363–72. pmid:20061651
  59. 59. Steiger TK, Weiskopf N, Bunzeck N. Iron level and myelin content in the ventral striatum predict memory performance in the aging brain. Journal of Neuroscience. 2016;36(12):3552–8. pmid:27013683
  60. 60. Sullivan EV, Adalsteinsson E, Rohlfing T, Pfefferbaum A. Relevance of Iron Deposition in Deep Gray Matter Brain Structures to Cognitive and Motor Performance in Healthy Elderly Men and Women: Exploratory Findings. Brain Imaging and Behavior. 2009;3(2):167–75. pmid:20161183
  61. 61. Sun Y, Ge X, Han X, Cao W, Wang Y, Ding W, et al. Characterizing brain iron deposition in patients with subcortical vascular mild cognitive impairment using quantitative susceptibility mapping: A potential biomarker. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. 2017;9(81):1–10.
  62. 62. Thomas GEC, Leyland LA, Schrag AE, Lees AJ, Acosta-Cabronero J, Weil RS. Brain iron deposition is linked with cognitive severity in Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. 2020;91:418–25. pmid:32079673
  63. 63. Valdés Hernández M, Ritchie S, Glatz A, Allerhand M, Muñoz Maniega S, Gow AJ, et al. Brain iron deposits and lifespan cognitive ability. Age. 2015;37(100):1–13.
  64. 64. van Bergen JMG, Li X, Hua J, Schreiner SJ, Steininger SC, Quevenco FC, et al. Colocalization of cerebral iron with Amyloid beta in Mild Cognitive Impairment. Scientific Reports. 2016;6(35514):1–9.
  65. 65. Wang D, Zhu D, Wei X-E, Li Y-H, Li W-B. Using susceptibility-weighted images to quantify iron deposition differences in amnestic mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Neurol India [Internet]. 2013;61:26–34. Available from: http://www.neurologyindia.com/article.asp?issn=0028-3886;year=2013;volume=61;issue=1;spage=26;epage=34;aulast=Wang pmid:23466836
  66. 66. Yang Q, Zhou L, Liu C, Liu D, Zhang Y, Li C, et al. Brain iron deposition in type 2 diabetes mellitus with and without mild cognitive impairment—an in vivo susceptibility mapping study. Brain Imaging and Behavior [Internet]. 2018;12:1479–87. Available from: pmid:29297155
  67. 67. Newsome MR, Durgerian S, Mourany L, Scheibel RS, Lowe MJ, Beall EB, et al. Disruption of caudate working memory activation in chronic blast-related traumatic brain injury. NeuroImage: Clinical [Internet]. 2015;8:543–53. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2015.04.024
  68. 68. Bick SK, Patel SR, Katnani HA, Peled N, Widge A, Cash SS, et al. Caudate stimulation enhances learning. Brain. 2019;142:2930–7. pmid:31504220
  69. 69. Roozendaal B, Mcgaugh JL. Memory modulation. Behavioral Neuroscience. 2011;125(6):797–824. pmid:22122145
  70. 70. Nyberg L, Karalija N, Salami A, Andersson M, Wåhlin A, Kaboovand N, et al. Dopamine D2 receptor availability is linked to hippocampal-caudate functional connectivity and episodic memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2016;113(28):7918–23. pmid:27339132
  71. 71. Nour MM, Dahoun T, McCutcheon RA, Adams RA, Wall MB, Howes OD. Task-induced functional brain connectivity mediates the relationship between striatal D2/3 receptors and working memory. eLife. 2019;8:e45045. pmid:31290741
  72. 72. Hare DJ, Double KL. Iron and dopamine: A toxic couple. Brain. 2016;139:1026–35. pmid:26962053
  73. 73. Erikson KM, Jones BC, Hess EJ, Zhang Q, Beard JL. Iron deficiency decreases dopamine D1 and D2 receptors in rat brain. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior. 2001;69(3–4):409–18.
  74. 74. Erikson KM, Jones BC, Beard JL. Iron Deficiency Alters Dopamine Transporter Functioning in Rat Striatum. The Journal of Nutrition. 2000;130(11):2831–7. pmid:11053528
  75. 75. Jackson SAW, Horst NK, Axelsson SFA, Horiguchi N, Cockcroft GJ, Robbins TW, et al. Selective Role of the Putamen in Serial Reversal Learning in the Marmoset. Cerebral Cortex. 2019;29(1):447–60. pmid:30395188
  76. 76. Vicente AF, Bermudez MA, Romero MDC, Perez R, Gonzalez F. Putamen neurons process both sensory and motor information during a complex task. Brain Research [Internet]. 2012;1466:70–81. Available from: pmid:22640776
  77. 77. Viñas-Guasch N, Wu YJ. The role of the putamen in language: a meta-analytic connectivity modeling study. Brain Structure and Function. 2017;222(9):3991–4004. pmid:28585051
  78. 78. Hünerli D, Emek-Savaş DD, Çavuşoğlu B, Dönmez Çolakoğlu B, Ada E, Yener GG. Mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease is associated with decreased P300 amplitude and reduced putamen volume. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2019;130(8):1208–17. pmid:31163365
  79. 79. Cousins DA, Burton EJ, Burn D, Gholkar AR, Mckeith I, O’Brien JT. Atrophy of the putamen in dementia with lewy bodies but not Alzheimer’s disease: An MRI study. Neurology. 2003;61(9):1191–5. pmid:14610119
  80. 80. Manes JL, Tjaden K, Parrish T, Simuni T, Roberts A, Greenlee JD, et al. Altered resting-state functional connectivity of the putamen and internal globus pallidus is related to speech impairment in Parkinson’s disease. Brain and Behavior. 2018;8(9):1–20.
  81. 81. Krämer J, Meuth SG, Tenberge JG, Schiffler P, Wiendl H, Deppe M. Early and degressive putamen atrophy in multiple sclerosis. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2015;16(10):23195–209. pmid:26404239
  82. 82. Öztekin L, Nicole M, Badre D. Striatal plasticity and basal ganglia circuit function. Neuron [Internet]. 2008;60(4):543–54. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3624763/pdf/nihms412728.pdf pmid:19038213
  83. 83. Whitfield J. B., Treloar S., Zhu G., Powell L. W. & Martin N. G. Relative importance of female-specific and non-female-specific effects on variation in iron stores between women. Br. J. Haematol. 2003; 120:860–866. pmid:12614223
  84. 84. House M. J., St. Pierre T. G., Milward E. A., Bruce D. G. & Olynyk J. K. Relationship between brain R2 and liver and serum iron concentrations in elderly men. Magn. Reson. Med. 2010; 63:275–281. pmid:20099321
  85. 85. Bartzokis G. et al. Brain ferritin iron may influence age- and gender-related risks of neurodegeneration. Neurobiol. Aging 2007; 28:414–423 pmid:16563566
  86. 86. Gong NJ, Dibb R, Bulk M, van der Weerd L, Liu C. Imaging beta amyloid aggregation and iron accumulation in Alzheimer’s disease using quantitative susceptibility mapping MRI. NeuroImage [Internet]. 2019;191:176–85. Available from: pmid:30739060
  87. 87. Yamamoto A, Shin R, Hasegawa K, Naiki H, Sato H, Yoshimasu F, et al. Iron (III) induces aggregation of hyperphosphorylated s and its reduction to iron (II) reverses the aggregation: implications in the formation of neurofibrillary tangles of Alzheimer ‘ s disease. Journal of Neurochemistry. 2002;82:1137–47. pmid:12358761
  88. 88. Liu B, Moloney A, Meehan S, Morris K, Thomas SE, Serpell LC, et al. Iron promotes the toxicity of amyloid β peptide by impeding its ordered aggregation. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2011;286(6):4248–56. pmid:21147772
  89. 89. Joppe K, Roser AE, Maass F, Lingor P. The contribution of iron to protein aggregation disorders in the central nervous system. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 2019;13(JAN):1–11. pmid:30740042
  90. 90. Telling ND, Everett J, Collingwood JF, Dobson J, van der Laan G, Gallagher JJ, et al. Iron Biochemistry is Correlated with Amyloid Plaque Morphology in an Established Mouse Model of Alzheimer’s Disease. Cell Chemical Biology [Internet]. 2017;24:1205–1215.e3. Available from: pmid:28890316
  91. 91. Rao SS, Adlard PA. Untangling Tau and Iron: Exploring the Interaction Between Iron and Tau in Neurodegeneration. Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience. 2018;11(August):1–13. pmid:29403353