Search

With the emergence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) disease-modifying therapies, identifying patients who could benefit from these treatments becomes critical. In this study, we evaluated whether a precise blood test could perform as well as established cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tests in detecting amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and tau tangles. Plasma %p-tau217 (ratio of phosporylated-tau217 to non-phosphorylated tau) was analyzed by mass spectrometry in the Swedish BioFINDER-2 cohort (n = 1,422) and the US Charles F. and Joanne Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (Knight ADRC) cohort (n = 337). Matched CSF samples were analyzed with clinically used and FDA-approved automated immunoassays for Aβ42/40 and p-tau181/Aβ42. The primary and secondary outcomes were detection of brain Aβ or tau pathology, respectively, using positron emission tomography (PET) imaging as the reference standard. Main analyses were focused on individuals with cognitive impairment (mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia), which is the target population for available disease-modifying treatments. Plasma %p-tau217 was clinically equivalent to FDA-approved CSF tests in classifying Aβ PET status, with an area under the curve (AUC) for both between 0.95 and 0.97. Plasma %p-tau217 was generally superior to CSF tests in classification of tau-PET with AUCs of 0.95-0.98. In cognitively impaired subcohorts (BioFINDER-2: n = 720; Knight ADRC: n = 50), plasma %p-tau217 had an accuracy, a positive predictive value and a negative predictive value of 89-90% for Aβ PET and 87-88% for tau PET status, which was clinically equivalent to CSF tests, further improving to 95% using a two-cutoffs approach. Blood plasma %p-tau217 demonstrated performance that was clinically equivalent or superior to clinically used FDA-approved CSF tests in the detection of AD pathology. Use of high-performance blood tests in clinical practice can improve access to accurate AD diagnosis and AD-specific treatments.

BackgroundImportant insights into the early pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease can be provided by studies of autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease and Down syndrome. However, it is unclear whether the timing and spatial distribution of amyloid accumulation differs between people with autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease and those with Down syndrome. We aimed to directly compare amyloid changes between these two groups of people.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, we included participants (aged ≥25 years) with Down syndrome and sibling controls who had MRI and amyloid PET scans in the first data release (January, 2020) of the Alzheimer's Biomarker Consortium-Down Syndrome (ABC-DS) study. We also included carriers of autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease genetic mutations and non-carrier familial controls who were within a similar age range to ABC-DS participants (25-73 years) and had MRI and amyloid PET scans at the time of a data freeze (December, 2020) of the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN) study. Controls from the two studies were combined into a single group. All DIAN study participants had genetic testing to determine PSEN1, PSEN2, or APP mutation status. APOE genotype was determined from blood samples. CSF samples were collected in a subset of ABC-DS and DIAN participants and the ratio of amyloid β42 (Aβ42) to Aβ40 (Aβ42/40) was measured to evaluate its Spearman's correlation with amyloid PET. Global PET amyloid burden was compared with regards to cognitive status, APOE ɛ4 status, sex, age, and estimated years to symptom onset. We further analysed amyloid PET deposition by autosomal dominant mutation type. We also assessed regional patterns of amyloid accumulation by estimated number of years to symptom onset. Within a subset of participants the relationship between amyloid PET and CSF Aβ42/40 was evaluated.Findings192 individuals with Down syndrome and 33 sibling controls from the ABC-DS study and 265 carriers of autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease mutations and 169 non-carrier familial controls from the DIAN study were included in our analyses. PET amyloid centiloid and CSF Aβ42/40 were negatively correlated in carriers of autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease mutations (n=216; r=-0·565; p

Evaluating correlations between disease biomarkers and clinical outcomes is crucial in biomedical research. During the early stages of many chronic diseases, changes in biomarkers and clinical outcomes are often subtle. A major challenge to detecting subtle correlations is that studies with large sample sizes are usually needed to achieve sufficient statistical power. This challenge is even greater when biofluid and imaging biomarker data are used because the required procedures are burdensome, perceived as invasive, and/or expensive, limiting sample sizes in individual studies. Combining data across multiple studies may increase statistical power, but biomarker data may be generated using different assay platforms, scanner types, or processing protocols, which may affect measured biomarker values. Therefore, harmonizing biomarker data is essential to combining data across studies. Bridging studies involve re-processing of a subset of samples or imaging scans to evaluate how biomarker values vary by studies. This presents an analytic challenge on how to best harmonize biomarker data across studies to allow unbiased and optimal estimates of their correlations with standardized clinical outcomes. We conceptualize that a latent biomarker underlies the observed biomarkers across studies, and propose a novel approach that integrates the data in the bridging study with the study-specific biomarker data for estimating the biological correlations between biomarkers and clinical outcomes. Through extensive simulations, we compare our method to several alternative methods/algorithms often used to estimate the correlations. Finally, we demonstrate the application of this methodology to a real-world multi-center Alzheimer's disease biomarker study to correlate cerebrospinal fluid biomarker concentrations with cognitive outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study was undertaken to apply established and emerging cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers to improve diagnostic accuracy in patients with rapidly progressive dementia (RPD). Overlap in clinical presentation and results of diagnostic tests confounds etiologic diagnosis in patients with RPD. Objective measures are needed to improve diagnostic accuracy and to recognize patients with potentially treatment‐responsive causes of RPD. Methods: Biomarkers of Alzheimer disease neuropathology (amyloid‐β 42/40 ratio, phosphorylated tau [p‐tau181, p‐tau231]), neuroaxonal/neuronal injury (neurofilament light chain [NfL], visinin‐like protein‐1 [VILIP‐1], total tau), neuroinflammation (chitinase‐3‐like protein [YKL‐40], soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 [sTREM2], glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP], monocyte chemoattractant protein‐1 [MCP‐1]), and synaptic dysfunction (synaptosomal‐associated protein 25kDa, neurogranin) were measured in CSF obtained at presentation from 78 prospectively accrued patients with RPD due to neurodegenerative, vascular, and autoimmune/inflammatory diseases; 35 age‐ and sex‐matched patients with typically progressive neurodegenerative disease; and 72 cognitively normal controls. Biomarker levels were compared across etiologic diagnoses, by potential treatment responsiveness, and between patients with typical and rapidly progressive presentations of neurodegenerative disease. Results: Alzheimer disease biomarkers were associated with neurodegenerative causes of RPD. High NfL, sTREM2, and YKL‐40 and low VILIP‐1 identified patients with autoimmune/inflammatory diseases. MCP‐1 levels were highest in patients with vascular causes of RPD. A multivariate model including GFAP, MCP‐1, p‐tau181, and sTREM2 identified the 44 patients with treatment‐responsive causes of RPD with 89% accuracy. Minimal differences were observed between typical and rapidly progressive presentations of neurodegenerative disease. Interpretation: Selected CSF biomarkers at presentation were associated with etiologic diagnoses and treatment responsiveness in patients with heterogeneous causes of RPD. The ability of cross‐sectional biomarkers to inform upon mechanisms that drive rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disease is less clear. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:299–313 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adults with Down Syndrome (DS) develop Alzheimer disease (AD)‐like pathology and dementia as they age. This is attributed to triplication of the amyloid precursor protein gene. Recent work demonstrated that amyloid is elevated in DS and accumulates in a similar topography to autosomal dominant AD (ADAD). Tau accumulation is the second hallmark of AD and may be measured using tau positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. The pattern of tau accumulation remains unknown in DS. Method: In a cross‐sectional analysis we evaluated amyloid and tau positron emission tomography (PET) in 124 participants with DS (109 cognitively stable, 8 symptomatic, 7 no consensus), 29 ADAD mutation carriers (26 asymptomatic, 3 symptomatic), and 201 cognitively normal non‐mutation carriers (CN). Regional cortical standard uptake value ratios (SUVR) for tau imaging were obtained and compared by cognitive status. Similarly, regional cortical amyloid SUVR were obtained and converted to centiloids. We then compared the magnitude of tau burden as well as spatial spread of tau across groups relative to amyloid burden. Result: Compared to CN, tau PET binding was elevated in participants with (µDS = 2.12 ± 0.22 SUVR, µADAD = 2.52 ± 0.37 SUVR) and without (µDS = 1.24 ± 0.15 SUVR, µADAD = 1.16 ± 0.19 SUVR) cognitive changes. For both groups, tau increased with increasing amyloid (centiloids). In some regions, DS had greater tau burden for a given amyloid level (centiloids) (Figure 1). There was increased spatial distribution of tau throughout the brain for participants with DS compared to CN. In contrast, tau burden was more focal in participants with ADAD with tau primarily elevated in posterior regions (Figure 2). Conclusion: While tau burden was higher with symptomatic disease for both groups, significant differences existed in the overall amount and spatial spread. Tau spread was greatest in participants with DS and more diffuse compared to ADAD. These results indicate a substantial tau burden is present in DS, and suggest not only anti‐amyloid but also tau‐reducing agents should be considered for treating cognitive decline in adults with DS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heterogeneity in progression to Alzheimer's disease (AD) poses challenges for both clinical prognosis and clinical trial implementation. Multiple AD-related subtypes have previously been identified, suggesting differences in receptivity to drug interventions. We identified early differences in preclinical AD biomarkers, assessed patterns for developing preclinical AD across the amyloid-tau-(neurodegeneration) [AT(N)] framework, and considered potential sources of difference by analysing the CSF proteome. Participants (n = 10) enrolled in longitudinal studies at the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center completed four or more lumbar punctures. These individuals were cognitively normal at baseline. Cerebrospinal fluid measures of amyloid-β (Aβ)42, phosphorylated tau (pTau181), and neurofilament light chain (NfL) as well as proteomics values were evaluated. Imaging biomarkers, including PET amyloid and tau, and structural MRI, were repeatedly obtained when available. Individuals were staged according to the amyloid-tau-(neurodegeneration) framework. Growth mixture modelling, an unsupervised clustering technique, identified three patterns of biomarker progression as measured by CSF pTau181 and Aβ42. Two groups (AD Biomarker Positive and Intermediate AD Biomarker) showed distinct progression from normal biomarker status to having biomarkers consistent with preclinical AD. A third group (AD Biomarker Negative) did not develop abnormal AD biomarkers over time. Participants grouped by CSF trajectories were re-classified using only proteomic profiles (AUCAD Biomarker Positive versus AD Biomarker Negative = 0.857, AUCAD Biomarker Positive versus Intermediate AD Biomarkers = 0.525, AUCIntermediate AD Biomarkers versus AD Biomarker Negative = 0.952). We highlight heterogeneity in the development of AD biomarkers in cognitively normal individuals. We identified some individuals who became amyloid positive before the age of 50 years. A second group, Intermediate AD Biomarkers, developed elevated CSF ptau181 significantly before becoming amyloid positive. A third group were AD Biomarker Negative over repeated testing. Our results could influence the selection of participants for specific treatments (e.g. amyloid-reducing versus other agents) in clinical trials. CSF proteome analysis highlighted additional non-AT(N) biomarkers for potential therapies, including blood–brain barrier-, vascular-, immune-, and neuroinflammatory-related targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Given the triplication of chromosome 21 and the location of the amyloid precursor protein gene on chromosome 21, almost all adults with Down syndrome (DS) develop Alzheimer disease (AD)‐like pathology and dementia during their lifetime. Comparing amyloid accumulation in DS to autosomal dominant AD (ADAD), another genetic form of AD, may improve our understanding of early AD pathology development. Method: We assessed amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in 192 participants with DS and 33 sibling controls from the Alzheimer's Biomarker Consortium‐Down Syndrome (ABC‐DS) and 265 mutation‐carriers (MC) and 169 familial controls from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN) (Table 1). We calculated regional standard uptake value ratios (SUVR) using a cerebellar cortex reference region and converted global amyloid burden SUVR to centiloids. We compared amyloid PET by cognitive status and estimated‐years‐to‐symptom‐onset (EYO). EYO was calculated for DIAN participants by subtracting their age from parental age of symptom onset and for ABC‐DS participants by subtracting their age from 50.2 years, a published average age of symptom onset in a large sample of individuals with DS (Fortea et al., 2020). In a subset of participants, we assessed the relationship between amyloid PET and CSF Aβ42/40. Result: The relationship between CSF Aβ42/40 and amyloid PET was similar in DS and MC participants (Figure 1). We did not observe significant differences between MC and DS grouped by cognitive status (Figure 2). However, when assessed over EYO, global amyloid burden was significantly elevated in MC at EYO ≥ ‐23 but was not elevated in DS until EYO ≥ ‐15 (Figure 3). We observed early cortical and subcortical amyloid PET increases in both groups, but we also measured some regional differences in amyloid PET changes between MC and DS, specifically in the medial occipital region (Figure 4 and 5). Conclusion: These results demonstrate similarities in the relationship between amyloid biomarkers and the levels of amyloid accumulation in ADAD and DS. However, we also observed a 5‐10 year delay and some regional differences in amyloid accumulation in DS. This is important for future clinical trials to consider when recruiting participants and determining treatment efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]