Beach, Thomas G.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Multi‐omics studies in Alzheimer's disease (AD) revealed many potential disease pathways and therapeutic targets. Despite their promise of precision medicine, these studies lacked Black Americans (BA) and Latin Americans (LA), who are disproportionately affected by AD. METHODS To bridge this gap, Accelerating Medicines Partnership in Alzheimer's Disease (AMP‐AD) expanded brain multi‐omics profiling to multi‐ethnic donors. RESULTS We generated multi‐omics data and curated and harmonized phenotypic data from BA ( n = 306), LA ( n = 326), or BA and LA ( n = 4) brain donors plus non‐Hispanic White ( n = 252) and other ( n = 20) ethnic groups, to establish a foundational dataset enriched for BA and LA participants. This study describes the data available to the research community, including transcriptome from three brain regions, whole genome sequence, and proteome measures. DISCUSSION The inclusion of traditionally underrepresented groups in multi‐omics studies is essential to discovering the full spectrum of precision medicine targets that will be pertinent to all populations affected with AD. Highlights Accelerating Medicines Partnership in Alzheimer's Disease Diversity Initiative led brain tissue profiling in multi‐ethnic populations. Brain multi‐omics data is generated from Black American, Latin American, and non‐Hispanic White donors. RNA, whole genome sequencing and tandem mass tag proteomicsis completed and shared. Multiple brain regions including caudate, temporal and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex were profiled.

Abstract The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association convened three separate work groups in 2011 and single work groups in 2012 and 2018 to create recommendations for the diagnosis and characterization of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The present document updates the 2018 research framework in response to several recent developments. Defining diseases biologically, rather than based on syndromic presentation, has long been standard in many areas of medicine (e.g., oncology), and is becoming a unifying concept common to all neurodegenerative diseases, not just AD. The present document is consistent with this principle. Our intent is to present objective criteria for diagnosis and staging AD, incorporating recent advances in biomarkers, to serve as a bridge between research and clinical care. These criteria are not intended to provide step‐by‐step clinical practice guidelines for clinical workflow or specific treatment protocols, but rather serve as general principles to inform diagnosis and staging of AD that reflect current science. Highlights We define Alzheimer's disease (AD) to be a biological process that begins with the appearance of AD neuropathologic change (ADNPC) while people are asymptomatic. Progression of the neuropathologic burden leads to the later appearance and progression of clinical symptoms. Early‐changing Core 1 biomarkers (amyloid positron emission tomography [PET], approved cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, and accurate plasma biomarkers [especially phosphorylated tau 217]) map onto either the amyloid beta or AD tauopathy pathway; however, these reflect the presence of ADNPC more generally (i.e., both neuritic plaques and tangles). An abnormal Core 1 biomarker result is sufficient to establish a diagnosis of AD and to inform clinical decision making throughout the disease continuum. Later‐changing Core 2 biomarkers (biofluid and tau PET) can provide prognostic information, and when abnormal, will increase confidence that AD is contributing to symptoms. An integrated biological and clinical staging scheme is described that accommodates the fact that common copathologies, cognitive reserve, and resistance may modify relationships between clinical and biological AD stages.

AbstractBackgroundThe G2019S leucine‐rich repeat kinase 2 (LRRK2) gene mutation is an important and commonly found genetic determinant of Parkinson's disease (PD). The neuropathological findings associated with this mutation have thus far been varied but are most often associated with Lewy body (LB) pathology.ObjectiveDescribe a case of clinical Parkinson's disease with levodopa responsiveness found to have LRRK2 mutations and the absence of Lewy bodies.MethodWe present an 89‐year‐old man with a 10‐year history of slowly progressive parkinsonism suspected to be secondary to Parkinson's disease.ResultsNeuropathological evaluation revealed nigral degeneration without Lewy bodies or Lewy neurites, but there were frequent tau‐immunopositive neurites and astrocytes in the putamen and substantia nigra, neocortical glial tau positive astrocytes associated with aging‐related tau astrogliopathy (ARTAG), as well as neurofibrillary tangles, beta amyloid plaques, and amyloid angiopathy typical of advanced Alzheimer's disease. G2019S LRRK2 homozygous mutations were found.ConclusionThis case illustrates that levodopa‐responsive clinical PD caused by G2019S LRRK2 mutations can occur without Lewy bodies.

AbstractBackgroundWhile preclinical studies have shown that alpha‐synuclein can spread through cell‐to‐cell transmission whether it can be transmitted between humans is unknown.ObjectivesThe aim was to assess the presence of a synucleinopathy in autopsied conjugal couples.MethodsNeuropathological findings in conjugal couples were categorized as Parkinson's disease (PD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Alzheimer's disease with Lewy bodies (ADLB), incidental Lewy body disease (ILBD), or no Lewy bodies.ResultsNinety conjugal couples were included; the mean age of death was 88.3 years; 32 couples had no Lewy bodies; 42 couples had 1 spouse with a synucleinopathy: 10 PD, 3 DLB, 13 ADLB, and 16 ILBD; 16 couples had both spouses with a synucleinopathy: in 4 couples both spouses had PD, 1 couple had PD and DLB, 4 couples had PD and ADLB, 2 couples had PD and ILBD, 1 couple had DLB and ADLB, in 3 couples both had ADLB, and 1 couple had ADLB and ILBD. No couples had both spouses with ILBD.ConclusionsThis large series of 90 autopsied conjugal couples found 16 conjugal couples with synucleinopathies, suggesting transmission of synucleinopathy between spouses is unlikely. © 2024 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

AbstractBackgroundNeuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are frequent in Alzheimer’s Disease dementia (ADD) but a higher NPS burden is found in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). Lewy body (LB) pathology frequently co‐occurs with AD pathology and may not meet neuropathological criteria for DLB (ADLB). Previous studies have shown that both ADLB and DLB cases have faster cognitive and/or functional decline compared to AD. However, the differences in NPS severity over disease course and survival in these pathologic subgroups is not well understood.MethodCases from the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders (AZSAND) with a final neuropathologic diagnosis of DLB (±AD co‐pathology; n = 65), ADLB (n = 89), AD (without LB) (n = 140), and controls (no neuropathological diagnosis) (n = 82) were included. Total NPI‐Q (scores ranging from 0‐36) at time of enrollment and within 2.5 years of death were calculated for all groups. Statistical analysis utilizing ANCOVA (adjusting for age, sex, baseline MMSE and cognitive symptom duration) with pairwise comparisons, and Kaplan‐Meier curves were completed.ResultAge at onset of cognitive symptoms was not different between pathology groups. NPI‐Q scores at enrollment were highest in ADLB (7.33 ± 4.85), and higher (p<0.001) than DLB (5.10 ± 3.37), AD (4.54 ± 3.63) and controls (1.78 ± 1.70). At final evaluation, NPI‐Q scores were highest in DLB (10.04 ± 6.28), followed by ADLB (8.0 ± 4.), and ADD (7.61 ± 5.05) when compared to controls (2.78 ± 3.97) (all p<0.001). DLB and AD demonstrated significant increases in NPI‐Q severity during follow up (p < 0.001). AD had longer survival time (5.8 years) compared to ADLB (4.0 years) and DLB (3.9 years). Subjects with NPS had a shorter median survival time (3.4 years) compared to subjects without NPS (6.5 years; p = 0.002).ConclusionA higher NPS burden and shorter survival is seen in both DLB and ADLB, as compared with AD. This suggests that diffuse neocortical LB pathology is not the major driver of either NPS or survival.

AbstractBackgroundPathological Lewy body disease (LBD) may commonly present clinically as Parkinson’s disease dementia (PDD), Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) or Alzheimer’s disease dementia (ADD). Neuropathological definitions also include a group in which ADD is present, but the postmortem Lewy pathology does not meet threshold density and distribution levels for the neuropathological diagnosis of DLB (ADLB). Little is known about the cognitive profiles of patients with ADLB and despite common underlying pathology, studies delineating neuropsychological profiles in LBD are fraught with inconsistencies. We characterized the longitudinal cognitive trajectories defined by neuropsychological profiles in cases along the pathological spectrum of LBD.MethodCases from the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders (AZSAND) with a cognitive diagnosis of dementia at death and who at minimum, had two neuropsychological evaluations were included. Final neuropathological diagnosis was determined as LBD (neocortical or limbic LB ± AD), ADLB, and AD pathology only. LBD cases were categorized by their cognitive clinical syndromes as PDD and DLB. Global cognition was evaluated using MMSE. Neuropsychological domains of Memory, Executive function, language, attention, and visuospatial were evaluated. Mixed linear methods were used to predict longitudinal change for a given baseline MMSE.Result287 participants and 1874 participant‐years of data were included in this study. LBD (n = 115), and ADLB (52) groups were predominantly male, while AD (n = 114) group was primarily female. Baseline MMSE was similar across all pathologic groups. Linear mixed modelling methods showed faster decrease in memory domain scores (decreasing 0.22 units/year – 0.42 units/year faster, p = 0.01) in ADLB group compared to other groups. Significantly faster decline was noted in LBD and ADLB group in clock drawing (p<0.001), fluency scores (declining 1.02 unit/year faster p<0.001) compared to AD group. There was no difference between PDD and DLB clinical subgroups.ConclusionIn autopsy confirmed cases, ADLB had an accelerated trajectory of decline in memory tasks, while AD, and LBD appeared to have similar trajectories. In contrast, all groups with Lewy bodies progressed faster and showed accelerated decline compared to AD in measures of frontal‐subcortical functions. These results may inform antemortem classification of patients and diagnostic accuracy in these groups.

AbstractBackgroundStructural variants range from simple loss or gain of genetic material to complex events that restructure entire chromosomes. This heterogeneity coupled with variant size greater than sequencing read‐length makes structural variant mapping from short‐read sequencing data difficult and error‐prone. Consequently, the role of structural variants is poorly explored in many phenotypes, including dementia.MethodWe used the GATK‐SV pipeline that combines four external structural variant mapping algorithms with machine‐learning to build high‐quality consensus structural variant calls. We applied GATK‐SV to short‐read whole‐genome sequencing data of 2,601 frontotemporal dementia‐amyotrophic lateral sclerosis spectrum (FTD/ALS) patients, 2,612 Lewy body dementia (LBD) patients, and 4,132 neurologically unaffected participants.ResultAfter stringent quality‐control, we performed genome‐wide association studies on 2,307 ALS/FTD patients versus 3,677 controls with 4,699 common structural variants and 2,355 LBD patients versus 3,700 controls with 4,889 common structural variants. In the FTD/ALS cohort, we identified well‐known risk variants at the C9orf72 (p‐value = 4.99×10‐18, OR = 14.47, 95% CI = 7.90–26.49) and MAPT loci (p‐value = 3.48×10‐6, OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.68–0.86) corroborating the ability of our pipeline to identify disease‐associated structural variants. Moreover, we discovered, replicated, and validated TPCN1 as a novel risk locus for LBD (p‐value = 9.18×10‐6, OR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.22–1.67). Further, we identified rare exonic variants with known pathogenic or likely pathogenic effects, such as an SNCA gene duplication in LBD and a deletion of exons 1 and 2 in CHCHD10 in FTD/ALS. We additionally observed structural variants in regulatory regions, e.g. a deletion of a key PSEN2 enhancer, which resulted in an approximate 0.70 fold‐change in PSEN2 expression in LBD. Finally, we built an interactive web app where structural variants can be visualized and explored (https://ndru-ndrs-lng-nih.shinyapps.io/non_ad_dementias_sv_app/).ConclusionCommon and rare structural variants play a role in LBD and FTD/ALS. Our structural variant resource is publicly available and can be used to further explore the role of structural variants in LBD and FTD/ALS.