SARS-CoV-2 is associated with changes in brain structure in UK Biobank

Gwenaëlle Douaud, Soojin Lee, Fidel Alfaro-Almagro, Christoph Arthofer, Chaoyue Wang, Paul McCarthy, Frederik Lange, Jesper L R Andersson, Ludovica Griffanti, Eugene Duff, Saad Jbabdi, Bernd Taschler, Peter Keating, Anderson M Winkler, Rory Collins, Paul M Matthews, Naomi Allen, Karla L Miller, Thomas E Nichols, Stephen M Smith, Gwenaëlle Douaud, Soojin Lee, Fidel Alfaro-Almagro, Christoph Arthofer, Chaoyue Wang, Paul McCarthy, Frederik Lange, Jesper L R Andersson, Ludovica Griffanti, Eugene Duff, Saad Jbabdi, Bernd Taschler, Peter Keating, Anderson M Winkler, Rory Collins, Paul M Matthews, Naomi Allen, Karla L Miller, Thomas E Nichols, Stephen M Smith

Abstract

There is strong evidence of brain-related abnormalities in COVID-191-13. However, it remains unknown whether the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection can be detected in milder cases, and whether this can reveal possible mechanisms contributing to brain pathology. Here we investigated brain changes in 785 participants of UK Biobank (aged 51-81 years) who were imaged twice using magnetic resonance imaging, including 401 cases who tested positive for infection with SARS-CoV-2 between their two scans-with 141 days on average separating their diagnosis and the second scan-as well as 384 controls. The availability of pre-infection imaging data reduces the likelihood of pre-existing risk factors being misinterpreted as disease effects. We identified significant longitudinal effects when comparing the two groups, including (1) a greater reduction in grey matter thickness and tissue contrast in the orbitofrontal cortex and parahippocampal gyrus; (2) greater changes in markers of tissue damage in regions that are functionally connected to the primary olfactory cortex; and (3) a greater reduction in global brain size in the SARS-CoV-2 cases. The participants who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 also showed on average a greater cognitive decline between the two time points. Importantly, these imaging and cognitive longitudinal effects were still observed after excluding the 15 patients who had been hospitalised. These mainly limbic brain imaging results may be the in vivo hallmarks of a degenerative spread of the disease through olfactory pathways, of neuroinflammatory events, or of the loss of sensory input due to anosmia. Whether this deleterious effect can be partially reversed, or whether these effects will persist in the long term, remains to be investigated with additional follow-up.

Conflict of interest statement

R.C. has been seconded from the University of Oxford as chief executive and principal investigator of UK Biobank, which is a charitable company. N.A. is chief scientist for UK Biobank. P.M.M. acknowledges consultancy fees from Novartis and Biogen; he has received recent honoraria or speakers’ honoraria and research or educational funds from Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb and Biogen. P.M.M. serves as the honorary chair of the UK Biobank Imaging Working Group and as an unpaid member of the UK Biobank Steering Committee; he is chair of the UKRI Medical Research Council Neurosciences and Mental Health Board.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1. The most significant longitudinal group…
Fig. 1. The most significant longitudinal group comparison results from the hypothesis-driven approach.
ad, The top four regions consistently showing longitudinal differences across the three models comparing SARS-CoV-2 cases and controls demonstrated either a significantly greater reduction in grey matter thickness and intensity contrast, or an increase in tissue damage (largest combined |Z| across Models 1–3). All three models pointed to the involvement of the parahippocampal gyrus (a), whereas Models 1 and 2 also showed the significant involvement of the left orbitofrontal cortex (b) and of the functional connections of the primary olfactory cortex (c, d). For each region, the IDP’s spatial region of interest is shown at the top left in blue, overlaid either on the FreeSurfer average inflated cortical surface, or the T1 template (left is shown on the right). For each IDP, the longitudinal percentage changes are shown with age for the two groups (control participants in blue, participants with infection in orange), obtained by normalising ΔIDP using the values for the corresponding IDPs across the 785 participants’ scans as the baseline. These are created using a 10-year sliding window average, with s.e.m. values shown in grey. The counter-intuitive increase in thickness in the orbitofrontal cortex in older controls has been previously consistently reported in studies of ageing,. The difference in cortical thickness, intensity contrast or diffusion indices between the two time points is shown for the 384 controls (blue) and 401 infected participants (orange), enabling a visual comparison between the two groups in a binary manner (therefore underestimating the effects estimated when modulating with age; see the ‘Main longitudinal model, deconfounding’ section in the Methods). The 15 hospitalised patients are indicated (red circles). ISOVF, isotropic volume fraction; OD, orientation dispersion. All y axes represent the percentage change.
Fig. 2. Vertex-wise and voxel-wise longitudinal group…
Fig. 2. Vertex-wise and voxel-wise longitudinal group differences in grey matter thickness and mean diffusivity changes.
Top, the main analysis (Model 1): the thresholded map (|Z| > 3) shows that the strongest, localised reductions in grey matter thickness in the 401 infected participants compared with the 384 controls are bilaterally in the parahippocampal gyrus, anterior cingulate cortex and temporal pole, as well as in the left orbitofrontal cortex, insula and supramarginal gyrus. Similarly, the strongest longitudinal differences in mean diffusivity (|Z| > 3, left is shown on the right) could be seen in the orbitofrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex, as well as in the left insula and amygdala (top). Bottom, secondary analysis (Model 4): the thresholded cortical thickness map (|Z| > 3) demonstrated longitudinal differences between the 15 hospitalised and 386 non-hospitalised SARS-CoV-2-positive cases in the orbitofrontal frontal cortex and parahippocampal gyrus bilaterally, right anterior cingulate cortex, as well as marked widespread differences in fronto-parietal and temporal areas, especially in the left hemisphere. We show the voxel-wise or vertex-wise longitudinal effects for illustrative purposes, avoiding any thresholding based on significance (as this would be statistically circular), similar to our previous analyses.
Fig. 3. Significant longitudinal differences in cognition.
Fig. 3. Significant longitudinal differences in cognition.
a, b, The percentage longitudinal change for SARS-CoV-2-positive cases and controls in the duration to complete trails A (a) and B (b) of the UK Biobank Trail Making Test. The absolute baseline (used to convert longitudinal change into percentage change) was estimated across the 785 participants. These curves were created using a ten-year sliding window across cases and controls (s.e. values are shown in grey).
Extended Data Fig. 1. Age distributions for…
Extended Data Fig. 1. Age distributions for SARS-CoV-2 positive participants and controls at each time point do not differ significantly.
Two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov was used to compute the P values for age comparisons, since age for each group was not normally distributed (Lilliefors P = 1e-03 for each group, and both age at Scan 1 or Scan 2). This showed no significant difference in age distribution between SARS-CoV-2 participants and controls at Scan 1: P = 0.15 or at Scan 2: P = 0.08.
Extended Data Fig. 2. Histograms showing the…
Extended Data Fig. 2. Histograms showing the well-matched distributions of Scan 1 - Scan 2 intervals for case and control groups.
The below IDP reproducibility Extended Data Fig. 3 shows, for comparison against the cases and controls, reproducibility from around 3,000 (2,943) UK Biobank participants who had returned for a second scan prior to the pandemic; hence we also show here the interscan intervals for this “3k” group, with tighter control over this interval (we have normalised each of those 3 groups to have a peak of 1, to make the relative comparison easier).
Extended Data Fig. 3. Scan-rescan reproducibility for…
Extended Data Fig. 3. Scan-rescan reproducibility for all 2,047 IDPs used in the main modelling.
Each dot represents a single IDP, arranged into different classes of IDPs. For each IDP, the vector of values for each subject (i.e., 785x1 vector) from the first scan was correlated with the equivalent vector of IDP values from the second scan. The y axis shows the resulting correlation coefficient. These calculations are made separately for the pre-pandemic scan-rescan datasets ("3k DPUK"), and for cases and controls, demonstrating highly similar distributions within each IDP class for all 3 subject groups.
Extended Data Fig. 4. QQ plot for…
Extended Data Fig. 4. QQ plot for −log10[Puncorr] against the theoretical null distribution.
The black line at y=x shows the expected plot if no effects were present in the data. Orange points reflect ΔIDPs where the case-control effect passes FDR significance, and blue reflects those that do not.
Extended Data Fig. 5. Model Z -statistics…
Extended Data Fig. 5. Model Z-statistics (one point per IDP, arranged in IDP classes) for the 4 main models.
Note that these are model Z-statistics, not raw effect size. Some IDP classes (e.g., cortical thickness and grey-white intensity contrast) show consistent group-difference effect directions across most IDPs (i.e., different brain regions), and all 4 models.
Extended Data Fig. 6. Examples of percentage…
Extended Data Fig. 6. Examples of percentage change in some of the most significant longitudinal group comparison results from the exploratory approach.
Four amongst the top IDPs consistently showing longitudinal differences between SARS-CoV-2 cases and controls. All demonstrate either a greater reduction in local or global brain thickness and volume, or an increase in CSF volume. For each four IDP are the percentage changes with age for the two groups, obtained by normalising ΔIDP using as baseline the values for the corresponding IDPs across the 785 scans (created using a 10-year sliding window across cases and controls, with standard errors in grey). The counterintuitive increase in thickness in the rostral anterior cingulate cortex in older controls has been previously consistently reported in studies of ageing, together with that of the orbitofrontal cortex,.

References

    1. Paterson RW, et al. The emerging spectrum of COVID-19 neurology: clinical, radiological and laboratory findings. Brain. 2020;143:3104–3120.
    1. de Erausquin GA, et al. The chronic neuropsychiatric sequelae of COVID-19: the need for a prospective study of viral impact on brain functioning. Alzheimers Dement. 2021;17:1056–1065.
    1. Yang AC, et al. Dysregulation of brain and choroid plexus cell types in severe COVID-19. Nature. 2021;595:565–571.
    1. Deleidi M, Isacson O. Viral and inflammatory triggers of neurodegenerative diseases. Sci. Transl. Med. 2012;4:121ps123.
    1. Butowt R, Meunier N, Bryche B, von Bartheld CS. The olfactory nerve is not a likely route to brain infection in COVID-19: a critical review of data from humans and animal models. Acta Neuropathol. 2021;141:809–822.
    1. Taquet M, Geddes JR, Husain M, Luciano S, Harrison PJ. 6-month neurological and psychiatric outcomes in 236 379 survivors of COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records. Lancet Psychiatry. 2021;8:416–427.
    1. Taquet M, Luciano S, Geddes JR, Harrison PJ. Bidirectional associations between COVID-19 and psychiatric disorder: retrospective cohort studies of 62 354 COVID-19 cases in the USA. Lancet Psychiatry. 2021;8:130–140.
    1. Helms J, et al. Neurologic features in severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020;382:2268–2270.
    1. Manca R, De Marco M, Ince P. G., Venneri A. Heterogeneity in regional damage detected by neuroimaging and neuropathological studies in older adults with COVID-19: a cognitive-neuroscience systematic review to inform the long-term impact of the virus on neurocognitive trajectories. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2021;13:646908.
    1. Mukerji SS, Solomon IH. What can we learn from brain autopsies in COVID-19? Neurosci. Lett. 2021;742:135528.
    1. Meinhardt J, et al. Olfactory transmucosal SARS-CoV-2 invasion as a port of central nervous system entry in individuals with COVID-19. Nat. Neurosci. 2021;24:168–175.
    1. Puelles VG, et al. Multiorgan and renal tropism of SARS-CoV-2. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020;383:590–592.
    1. Matschke J, et al. Neuropathology of patients with COVID-19 in Germany: a post-mortem case series. Lancet Neurol. 2020;19:919–929.
    1. Chertow, D. et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection and persistence throughout the human body and brain. Preprint at Research Square10.21203/-1139035/v1 (2021).
    1. Philippens, I. H. C. H. M. et al. SARS-CoV-2 causes brain inflammation and induces Lewy body formation in macaques. Preprint at bioRxiv10.1101/2021.02.23.432474 (2021).
    1. Lechien JR, et al. Olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions as a clinical presentation of mild-to-moderate forms of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a multicenter European study. Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 2020;277:2251–2261.
    1. Cooper KW, et al. COVID-19 and the chemical senses: supporting players take center stage. Neuron. 2020;107:219–233.
    1. Hosp JA, et al. Cognitive impairment and altered cerebral glucose metabolism in the subacute stage of COVID-19. Brain. 2021;144:1263–1276.
    1. Postma EM, Smeets PAM, Boek WM, Boesveldt S. Investigating morphological changes in the brain in relation to etiology and duration of olfactory dysfunction with voxel-based morphometry. Sci. Rep. 2021;11:12704.
    1. Butowt R, Bilinska K. SARS-CoV-2: olfaction, brain infection, and the urgent need for clinical samples allowing earlier virus detection. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2020;11:1200–1203.
    1. Netland J, Meyerholz DK, Moore S, Cassell M, Perlman S. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection causes neuronal death in the absence of encephalitis in mice transgenic for human ACE2. J. Virol. 2008;82:7264–7275.
    1. Brann DH, et al. Non-neuronal expression of SARS-CoV-2 entry genes in the olfactory system suggests mechanisms underlying COVID-19-associated anosmia. Sci. Adv. 2020;6:eabc5801.
    1. Carmichael ST, Clugnet MC, Price JL. Central olfactory connections in the macaque monkey. J. Comp. Neurol. 1994;346:403–434.
    1. Palouzier-Paulignan B, et al. Olfaction under metabolic influences. Chem. Senses. 2012;37:769–797.
    1. Guedj E, et al. 18F-FDG brain PET hypometabolism in post-SARS-CoV-2 infection: substrate for persistent/delayed disorders? Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging. 2021;48:592–595.
    1. Raman B, et al. Medium-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on multiple vital organs, exercise capacity, cognition, quality of life and mental health, post-hospital discharge. EClinicalMedicine. 2021;31:100683.
    1. Griffanti L, et al. Adapting the UK Biobank brain imaging protocol and analysis pipeline for the C-MORE multi-organ study of COVID-19 survivors. Front. Neurol. 2021;12:753284.
    1. Reichert JL, Schopf V. Olfactory loss and regain: lessons for neuroplasticity. Neuroscientist. 2018;24:22–35.
    1. Han P, et al. Olfactory brain gray matter volume reduction in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2017;7:551–556.
    1. Zhou G, Lane G, Cooper SL, Kahnt T, Zelano C. Characterizing functional pathways of the human olfactory system. eLife. 2019;8:e47177.
    1. Fraser MA, et al. Longitudinal trajectories of hippocampal volume in middle to older age community dwelling individuals. Neurobiol. Aging. 2021;97:97–105.
    1. Ronnlund M, Nyberg L, Backman L, Nilsson LG. Stability, growth, and decline in adult life span development of declarative memory: cross-sectional and longitudinal data from a population-based study. Psychol. Aging. 2005;20:3–18.
    1. Vidal-Pineiro D, et al. Individual variations in ‘brain age’ relate to early-life factors more than to longitudinal brain change. eLife. 2021;10:e69995.
    1. Diana RA, Yonelinas AP, Ranganath C. Imaging recollection and familiarity in the medial temporal lobe: a three-component model. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2007;11:379–386.
    1. Staresina BP, Duncan KD, Davachi L. Perirhinal and parahippocampal cortices differentially contribute to later recollection of object- and scene-related event details. J. Neurosci. 2011;31:8739–8747.
    1. Naya Y, Suzuki WA. Integrating what and when across the primate medial temporal lobe. Science. 2011;333:773–776.
    1. Doty RL. Olfaction: smell of change in the air. Cerebrum. 2017;2017:cer-10-17.
    1. Avery JA, et al. Taste quality representation in the human brain. J. Neurosci. 2020;40:1042–1052.
    1. Chikazoe J, Lee DH, Kriegeskorte N, Anderson AK. Distinct representations of basic taste qualities in human gustatory cortex. Nat. Commun. 2019;10:1048.
    1. Ferdon S, Murphy C. The cerebellum and olfaction in the aging brain: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroimage. 2003;20:12–21.
    1. Kas A, et al. The cerebral network of COVID-19-related encephalopathy: a longitudinal voxel-based 18F-FDG-PET study. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging. 2021;48:2543–2557.
    1. Qin Y, et al. Long-term microstructure and cerebral blood flow changes in patients recovered from COVID-19 without neurological manifestations. J. Clin. Invest. 2021;131:e147329.
    1. Tsai ST, Lu MK, San S, Tsai CH. The neurologic manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: a systemic review. Front. Neurol. 2020;11:498.
    1. Han P, Musch M, Abolmaali N, Hummel T. Improved odor identification ability and increased regional gray matter volume after olfactory training in patients with idiopathic olfactory loss. iPerception. 2021;12:20416695211005811.
    1. Blazhenets G, et al. Slow but evident recovery from neocortical dysfunction and cognitive impairment in a series of chronic COVID-19 patients. J. Nucl. Med. 2021;62:910–915.
    1. Douaud G, et al. DTI measures in crossing-fibre areas: increased diffusion anisotropy reveals early white matter alteration in MCI and mild Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroimage. 2011;55:880–890.
    1. Douaud G, et al. Preventing Alzheimer’s disease-related gray matter atrophy by B-vitamin treatment. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA. 2013;110:9523–9528.
    1. Fawns-Ritchie C, Deary IJ. Reliability and validity of the UK Biobank cognitive tests. PLoS ONE. 2020;15:e0231627.
    1. Mahlberg R, Adli M, Bschor T, Kienast T. Age effects on trail making test during acute depressive and manic episode. Int. J. Neurosci. 2008;118:1347–1356.
    1. Mahurin RK, et al. Trail making test errors and executive function in schizophrenia and depression. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2006;20:271–288.
    1. Ashendorf L, et al. Trail making test errors in normal aging, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2008;23:129–137.
    1. Sobel N, et al. Odorant-induced and sniff-induced activation in the cerebellum of the human. J. Neurosci. 1998;18:8990–9001.
    1. Rowland MJ, et al. Early brain injury and cognitive impairment after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Sci. Rep. 2021;11:23245.
    1. Zhao S, et al. Rapid vigilance and episodic memory decrements in COVID-19 survivors. Brain Commun. 2022;4:fcab295.
    1. Heneka MT, Kummer MP, Latz E. Innate immune activation in neurodegenerative disease. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2014;14:463–477.
    1. Deeks JJ, et al. Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2020;6:CD013652.
    1. Salat DH, et al. Thinning of the cerebral cortex in aging. Cereb. Cortex. 2004;14:721–730.
    1. Zhao L, et al. Age-related differences in brain morphology and the modifiers in middle-aged and older adults. Cereb. Cortex. 2019;29:4169–4193.
    1. Elliott LT, et al. Genome-wide association studies of brain imaging phenotypes in UK Biobank. Nature. 2018;562:210–216.
    1. Miller KL, et al. Multimodal population brain imaging in the UK Biobank prospective epidemiological study. Nat. Neurosci. 2016;19:1523–1536.
    1. Alfaro-Almagro F, et al. Image processing and quality control for the first 10,000 brain imaging datasets from UK Biobank. Neuroimage. 2018;166:400–424.
    1. Littlejohns TJ, et al. The UK Biobank imaging enhancement of 100,000 participants: rationale, data collection, management and future directions. Nat. Commun. 2020;11:2624.
    1. Smith SM, et al. An expanded set of genome-wide association studies of brain imaging phenotypes in UK Biobank. Nat. Neurosci. 2021;24:737–745.
    1. Wang, C. et al. Phenotypic and genetic associations of quantitative magnetic susceptibility in UK Biobank brain imaging. Preprint at bioRxiv10.1101/2021.06.28.450248 (2021).
    1. Pauli WM, Nili AN, Tyszka JM. A high-resolution probabilistic in vivo atlas of human subcortical brain nuclei. Sci. Data. 2018;5:180063.
    1. Griffanti L, et al. BIANCA (Brain Intensity AbNormality Classification Algorithm): a new tool for automated segmentation of white matter hyperintensities. Neuroimage. 2016;141:191–205.
    1. Wang C, et al. Methods for quantitative susceptibility and R2* mapping in whole post-mortem brains at 7T applied to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neuroimage. 2020;222:117216.
    1. Iglesias JE, et al. A probabilistic atlas of the human thalamic nuclei combining ex vivo MRI and histology. Neuroimage. 2018;183:314–326.
    1. Iglesias JE, et al. Bayesian longitudinal segmentation of hippocampal substructures in brain MRI using subject-specific atlases. Neuroimage. 2016;141:542–555.
    1. Iglesias JE, et al. Bayesian segmentation of brainstem structures in MRI. Neuroimage. 2015;113:184–195.
    1. Saygin ZM, et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging reveals nuclei of the human amygdala: manual segmentation to automatic atlas. Neuroimage. 2017;155:370–382.
    1. Neudorfer C, et al. A high-resolution in vivo magnetic resonance imaging atlas of the human hypothalamic region. Sci. Data. 2020;7:305.
    1. Alfaro-Almagro F, et al. Confound modelling in UK Biobank brain imaging. Neuroimage. 2021;224:117002.
    1. Vickers AJ. The use of percentage change from baseline as an outcome in a controlled trial is statistically inefficient: a simulation study. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2001;1:6.
    1. Papst I, et al. Age-dependence of healthcare interventions for COVID-19 in Ontario, Canada. BMC Public Health. 2021;21:706.
    1. Levin AT, et al. Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2020;35:1123–1138.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する