Deans' stroke musings: Genetic Factors, Brain Atrophy, and Response to Rehabilitation Therapy After Stroke

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Tuesday, January 25, 2022

Genetic Factors, Brain Atrophy, and Response to Rehabilitation Therapy After Stroke

I got nothing out of this.

Another superstar stroke researcher(Steven C. Cramer) and we still don't get anything that helps us recover.

Dr. Steven Cramer (16 posts to October 2011)

Genetic Factors, Brain Atrophy, and Response to Rehabilitation Therapy After Stroke

Show all authors

Steven C. Cramer, MD

, Jill See, MPT, Brent Liu, PhD, ...

First Published December 21, 2021 Research Article Find in PubMed

Abstract

Objective

Patients show substantial differences in response to rehabilitation therapy after stroke. We hypothesized that specific genetic profiles might explain some of this variance and, secondarily, that genetic factors are related to cerebral atrophy post-stroke.

Methods

The phase 3 ICARE study examined response to motor rehabilitation therapies. In 216 ICARE enrollees, DNA was analyzed for presence of the BDNF val⁶⁶met and the ApoE ε4 polymorphism. The relationship of polymorphism status to 12-month change in motor status (Wolf Motor Function Test, WMFT) was examined. Neuroimaging data were also evaluated (n=127).

Results

Subjects were 61±13 years old (mean±SD) and enrolled 43±22 days post-stroke; 19.7% were BDNF val⁶⁶met carriers and 29.8% ApoE ε4 carriers. Carrier status for each polymorphism was not associated with WMFT, either at baseline or over 12 months of follow-up. Neuroimaging, acquired 5±11 days post-stroke, showed that BDNF val⁶⁶met polymorphism carriers had a 1.34-greater degree of cerebral atrophy compared to non-carriers (P=.01). Post hoc analysis found that age of stroke onset was 4.6 years younger in subjects with the ApoE ε4 polymorphism (P=.02).

Conclusion

Neither the val⁶⁶met BDNF nor ApoE ε4 polymorphism explained inter-subject differences in response to rehabilitation therapy. The BDNF val⁶⁶met polymorphism was associated with cerebral atrophy at baseline, echoing findings in healthy subjects, and suggesting an endophenotype. The ApoE ε4 polymorphism was associated with younger age at stroke onset, echoing findings in Alzheimer’s disease and suggesting a common biology. Genetic associations provide insights useful to understanding the biology of outcomes after stroke.

Keywords

stroke, rehabilitation, imaging, genetics, biomarker, endophenotype