Frisoni, Giovanni B.

Abstract Background The IWG and AA diagnostic criteria are major references in the Alzheimer's domain. Although they share analogies, some key differences should be recognized. Method The original IWG 2024 JAMA Neurology and AA 2024 Alzheimers Dement papers will be used as the major data references. Result I will outline the similarities and differences between the IWG and the AA criteria for Alzheimer's disease from the point of view of the former. I will discuss similarities regarding: Aim of clinical research on AD and other cognitive disorders, Role of co‐pathology, Role of brain reserve, Biomarker use, Indication for anti‐β‐amyloid, Contra‐indication for anti‐β‐amyloid, and Health care delivery model. I will discuss differences regarding: Core question, Scientific discourse, Knowledge source, Definition of AD, Diagnosis of AD, and Interventions for AD. Conclusion The differences between the two sets of criteria are not “just semantics”. A unified definition of AD is essential to advance the field and improve patient care.

Abstract Background Ten years after the original publication, the Centiloid framework is now broadly used to harmonize amyloid‐PET quantification, facilitate data sharing and comparison across cohorts, and even assist visual interpretation in clinical settings. We evaluated the global implementation of Centiloids by comparing their distribution and corresponding positivity thresholds across cohorts. Methods We gathered data from publicly available cohorts and reached out to investigators across the world to collect cross‐sectional Centiloids, demographic and clinical information, and visual read data. Gaussian mixture models (GMM, k=2) were fitted to Centiloid values for each cohort and cutoffs were calculated as mean + 2SD of the lower Gaussian. When visual reads were available, we determined Centiloid cutoffs that maximized correspondence with visual reads (Cohen's kappa). Data was combined across cohorts using random effects meta‐analyses. Results As of January 2025, we included 37 cohorts ( n = 41,678 participants) with heterogeneous pipelines, radiotracers, and clinical and demographic characteristics (Table‐1). The low Gaussian peaks ranged from ‐9 to 10CL; the meta‐analysis identified a common peak at 1CL. The second peaks were more heterogeneous (range=38‐102CL; meta‐analysis outcome=64CL). Across cohorts, the proportion of cognitively unimpaired versus impaired participants impacted the position of both peaks, with better separation in cohorts enriched in impaired individuals (Figure 1C). The meta‐analysis indicated a GMM‐based cutoff of 19CL (95%CI: 16‐21CL, Figure 1B); subgroup analyses showed no evidence of significant effect between single versus multicenter settings (17 versus 20CL, p = 0.30), MRI‐based or PET‐only processing (18 versus 19CL, p = 0.88), and no evidence of difference across radiotracers (Flutemetamol: 16CL; PIB: 17CL, Flutafuranol: 18CL, Florbetaben: 19CL, Florbetapir: 20CL, p = 0.78). In a subset of 29,496 participants with visual reads available, binary visual reads corresponded well to Centiloids (common kappa=0.86, Figure 2A). The visual read‐based cutoff of 24CL (95%CI: 21‐27CL, Figure 2B) maximized correspondence between visual read and quantification and was slightly higher than the GMM‐based cutoff. All meta‐analysis models showed high non‐random heterogeneity (I 2 >80%) across studies, suggesting non‐random differences in peaks and cutoffs. Conclusions Meta‐analysis‐based cutoffs align well with thresholds from the existing literature. High heterogeneity among studies underscores the need to investigate contributing factors, raising concerns about applying common cutoffs.

Abstract Background Sex, education and race/ethnicity are all associated with risk of Alzheimer's disease dementia. Here, we assess the effects of self‐reported sex, educational attainment and race/ethnicity on amyloid‐positivity, and tau‐PET‐positivity in 12,048 (7,394 cognitively unimpaired [CU], 2,177 MCI, and 2,477 dementia) individuals from 42 cohorts worldwide. Method Logistic generalized estimating equations were used to estimate frequency of amyloid‐positivity (using cohort‐specific thresholds for amyloid‐PET [84%] or CSF) and tau‐PET‐positivity (cohort‐specific thresholds of 2SD above mean temporal uptake in amyloid‐negative controls). We assessed: i) sex and APOEε4 ( N = 10,098) associations, to complement earlier findings of a higher frequency of tau‐positivity in females, ii) effects of lower/higher education ( N = 10,970; cohort‐specific median‐split), and iii) effects of race/ethnicity (non‐Hispanic White [hereafter: White], N = 4880; Asian, N = 116; Black or African‐American [hereafter: Black], N = 353; Hispanic, N = 356, only from Northern‐American cohorts). Outcomes were frequency of amyloid‐positivity in CU individuals only, and tau‐PET‐positivity in both amyloid‐positive (AB+) CU and cognitively impaired (CI, i.e. MCI and dementia) individuals. Interaction effects on the relationship between age and amyloid/tau‐positivity were assessed and only retained in the models when significant. Result Female sex was associated with an APOEε4 ‐independent increased frequency of amyloid‐positivity (β=0.51[0.22], p = 0.02) in CU and increase of tau‐positivity in both AB+CU (β=0.27[0.08]) and AB+CI (β=0.37[0.08], both p <0.01). Remarkably, tau‐positivity frequencies of female APOEε4 non‐carriers were equivalent to male APOEε4 carriers in AB+CI (Figure 1). No significant sex* APOE interactions were observed. In CU, higher education was associated with lower amyloid‐positivity frequency (β=‐0.12[0.05], p = 0.02). In contrast, among AB+CU, there was an age*education interaction effect that indicated more pronounced age effects on tau‐positivity in individuals with higher education (age*education:β interaction =0.03[0.01], p <0.01). There were no education effects in AB+CI (Figure 2). In CU, an age*race/ethnicity interaction effect was observed across all non‐White groups compared to White (Hispanic:β interaction =‐0.05[0.01], p <0.01; Black:‐0.04[0.01], p <0.01; Asian:‐0.02[0.01], p = 0.04). This suggests that the impact of age on amyloid‐positivity was less pronounced in non‐White groups. Furthermore, in AB+CI, Hispanic ethnicity was related to higher tau‐positivity frequency than White (β=0.51[0.22], p = 0.02; Figure 3). Conclusion In this multi‐center initiative comprised of clinical and community‐based cohorts, we observed that self‐reported sex, educational attainment and race/ethnicity were related to positivity‐frequencies of Alzheimer's disease pathology.

Abstract Background Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) is often misdiagnosed or conflated with Alzheimer's Disease (AD) due to overlapping clinical presentations and neuropathological features. The presence of AD‐like features correlates with accelerated cognitive decline and a worse overall prognosis. Compared to AD, studies suggest that amyloid uptake in DLB may spare the occipital lobe. This project aims to investigate whether amyloid PET could be leveraged to differentiate between AD and DLB patients, with the goal of improving diagnostic accuracy and supporting patient stratification and safety in anti‐amyloid trials. Method This study involves collaboration across six centres (University of Geneva, BioFINDER, AMPLE, AMYPAD PNHS, MCSA, GEHC), each contributing amyloid PET imaging data from patients diagnosed with DLB based on clinical or neuropathological assessments. Moreover, each center provided an additional subset of AD and healthy controls, then matched to DLB samples based on age/sex/APOE genotype/education for comparison. A sub analysis will be performed on patients with evidence of both DLB and AD markers. Given the relatively small sample size, key aspect of the methodological approach is to reduce technical sources of variability. The processing workflow includes rigorous quality control, formatting, normalisation to MNI space, harmonisation (differential smoothing), and MRI‐based segmentation. Result The dataset currently includes amyloid PET scans (acquired using [ 11 C]PiB, [ 18 F]Flutemetamol or [ 18 F]Florbetapir) and MRI scans from ∼130 DLB patients, along with ∼150 AD patients and ∼150 controls. In addition, 99 patients positive for the CSF α‐Synuclein Seeding Amplification Assay were included. Patient data were anonymized, and a harmonised database was created, including demographic characteristics, clinical history, and results from neuropsychological assessments. Conclusion The creation of a standardized, multi‐centre amyloid PET dataset for DLB will enable the study of amyloid PET patterns at the global, regional and voxel level, in comparison with uptake in AD patients and controls. This dataset will serve as a valuable resource for investigating the neuropathological underpinnings of DLB, improving diagnostic accuracy, and potentially guiding patient stratification in anti‐amyloid trials. Efforts to integrate [ 18 F]Florbetaben and additional data are ongoing.

Abstract Background Ten years after the original publication, the Centiloid framework is now broadly used to harmonize amyloid‐PET quantification, facilitate data sharing and comparison across cohorts, and even assist visual interpretation in clinical settings. We evaluated the global implementation of Centiloids by comparing their distribution and corresponding positivity thresholds across cohorts. Methods We gathered data from publicly available cohorts and reached out to investigators across the world to collect cross‐sectional Centiloids, demographic and clinical information, and visual read data. Gaussian mixture models (GMM, k=2) were fitted to Centiloid values for each cohort and cutoffs were calculated as mean + 2SD of the lower Gaussian. When visual reads were available, we determined Centiloid cutoffs that maximized correspondence with visual reads (Cohen’s kappa). Data was combined across cohorts using random effects meta‐analyses. Results As of January 2025, we included 37 cohorts ( n = 41,678 participants) with heterogeneous pipelines, radiotracers, and clinical and demographic characteristics (Table‐1). The low Gaussian peaks ranged from ‐9 to 10CL; the meta‐analysis identified a common peak at 1CL. The second peaks were more heterogeneous (range=38‐102CL; meta‐analysis outcome=64CL). Across cohorts, the proportion of cognitively unimpaired versus impaired participants impacted the position of both peaks, with better separation in cohorts enriched in impaired individuals (Figure‐1C). The meta‐analysis indicated a GMM‐based cutoff of 19CL (95%CI: 16‐21CL, Figure‐1B); subgroup analyses showed no evidence of significant effect between single versus multicenter settings (17 versus 20CL, p = 0.30), MRI‐based or PET‐only processing (18 versus 19CL, p = 0.88), and no evidence of difference across radiotracers (Flutemetamol: 16CL; PIB: 17CL, Flutafuranol: 18CL, Florbetaben: 19CL, Florbetapir: 20CL, p = 0.78). In a subset of 29,496 participants with visual reads available, binary visual reads corresponded well to Centiloids (common kappa=0.86, Figure‐2A). The visual read‐based cutoff of 24CL (95%CI: 21‐27CL, Figure‐2B) maximized correspondence between visual read and quantification and was slightly higher than the GMM‐based cutoff. All meta‐analysis models showed high non‐random heterogeneity (I 2 >80%) across studies, suggesting non‐random differences in peaks and cutoffs. Conclusions Meta‐analysis‐based cutoffs align well with thresholds from the existing literature. High heterogeneity among studies underscores the need to investigate contributing factors, raising concerns about applying common cutoffs.

Abstract Background Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) is often misdiagnosed or conflated with Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) due to overlapping clinical presentations and neuropathological features. The presence of AD‐like features correlates with accelerated cognitive decline and a worse overall prognosis. Compared to AD, studies suggest that amyloid uptake in DLB may spare the occipital lobe. This project aims to investigate whether amyloid PET could be leveraged to differentiate between AD and DLB patients, with the goal of improving diagnostic accuracy and supporting patient stratification and safety in anti‐amyloid trials. Method This study involves collaboration across six centres (University of Geneva, BioFINDER, AMPLE, AMYPAD PNHS, MCSA, GEHC), each contributing amyloid PET imaging data from patients diagnosed with DLB based on clinical or neuropathological assessments. Moreover, each center provided an additional subset of AD and healthy controls, then matched to DLB samples based on age/sex/APOE genotype/education for comparison. A sub analysis will be performed on patients with evidence of both DLB and AD markers. Given the relatively small sample size, key aspect of the methodological approach is to reduce technical sources of variability. The processing workflow includes rigorous quality control, formatting, normalisation to MNI space, harmonisation (differential smoothing), and MRI‐based segmentation. Result The dataset currently includes amyloid PET scans (acquired using [ 11 C]PiB, [ 18 F]Flutemetamol or [ 18 F]Florbetapir) and MRI scans from ∼130 DLB patients, along with ∼150 AD patients and ∼150 controls. In addition, 99 patients positive for the CSF α‐Synuclein Seeding Amplification Assay were included. Patient data were anonymized, and a harmonised database was created, including demographic characteristics, clinical history, and results from neuropsychological assessments. Conclusion The creation of a standardized, multi‐centre amyloid PET dataset for DLB will enable the study of amyloid PET patterns at the global, regional and voxel level, in comparison with uptake in AD patients and controls. This dataset will serve as a valuable resource for investigating the neuropathological underpinnings of DLB, improving diagnostic accuracy, and potentially guiding patient stratification in anti‐amyloid trials. Efforts to integrate [ 18 F]Florbetaben and additional data are ongoing.

Background The association between lifestyle factors and Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology remains incompletely understood. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the association of alcohol consumption, smoking behavior, sleep quality and physical, cognitive, and social activity with cerebral amyloid pathology. Methods For this cross-sectional study, we selected participants from the Amyloid Biomarker Study data pooling initiative. We used generalized estimating equations to assess associations of dichotomized lifestyle measures with amyloid pathology. Results We included 9171 participants with normal cognition (NC) and 2555 participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from the Amyloid Biomarker Study. Of participants with NC, 58% were women, 34% were APOE ε4 carrier, and 27% had amyloid pathology. Of participants with MCI, 48% were women, 47% were APOE ε4 carrier, and 57% had amyloid pathology. In NC, cognitively active participants were less likely to have amyloid pathology (OR = 0.77, 95%CI 0.66–0.89, p < 0.001). In MCI, participants who had ever smoked or had sleep problems were less likely to have amyloid pathology (OR = 0.85, 95%CI 0.73–0.99, p = 0.029; OR = 0.62, 95%CI 0.45–0.86, p = 0.004). Conclusions In NC, cognitive activity was associated with a lower frequency of amyloid pathology. In MCI, favorable lifestyle behaviors were not associated with a lower frequency of amyloid pathology. The results of the current study contribute to the broader evidence base on lifestyle and AD by further characterizing the role of lifestyle behaviors in AD pathology across different clinical stages.

Importance Depressive symptoms are associated with cognitive decline in older individuals. Uncertainty about underlying mechanisms hampers diagnostic and therapeutic efforts. This large-scale study aimed to elucidate the association between depressive symptoms and amyloid pathology. Objective To examine the association between depressive symptoms and amyloid pathology and its dependency on age, sex, education, and APOE genotype in older individuals without dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants Cross-sectional analyses were performed using data from the Amyloid Biomarker Study data pooling initiative. Data from 49 research, population-based, and memory clinic studies were pooled and harmonized. The Amyloid Biomarker Study has been collecting data since 2012 and data collection is ongoing. At the time of analysis, 95 centers were included in the Amyloid Biomarker Study. The study included 9746 individuals with normal cognition (NC) and 3023 participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) aged between 34 and 100 years for whom data on amyloid biomarkers, presence of depressive symptoms, and age were available. Data were analyzed from December 2022 to February 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures Amyloid-β1-42 levels in cerebrospinal fluid or amyloid positron emission tomography scans were used to determine presence or absence of amyloid pathology. Presence of depressive symptoms was determined on the basis of validated depression rating scale scores, evidence of a current clinical diagnosis of depression, or self-reported depressive symptoms. Results In individuals with NC (mean [SD] age, 68.6 [8.9] years; 5664 [58.2%] female; 3002 [34.0%] APOE ε4 carriers; 937 [9.6%] had depressive symptoms; 2648 [27.2%] had amyloid pathology), the presence of depressive symptoms was not associated with amyloid pathology (odds ratio [OR], 1.13; 95% CI, 0.90-1.40; P = .29). In individuals with MCI (mean [SD] age, 70.2 [8.7] years; 1481 [49.0%] female; 1046 [44.8%] APOE ε4 carriers; 824 [27.3%] had depressive symptoms; 1668 [55.8%] had amyloid pathology), the presence of depressive symptoms was associated with a lower likelihood of amyloid pathology (OR, 0.73; 95% CI 0.61-0.89; P = .001). When considering subgroup effects, in individuals with NC, the presence of depressive symptoms was associated with a higher frequency of amyloid pathology in APOE ε4 noncarriers (mean difference, 5.0%; 95% CI 1.0-9.0; P = .02) but not in APOE ε4 carriers. This was not the case in individuals with MCI. Conclusions and Relevance Depressive symptoms were not consistently associated with a higher frequency of amyloid pathology in participants with NC and were associated with a lower likelihood of amyloid pathology in participants with MCI. These findings were not influenced by age, sex, or education level. Mechanisms other than amyloid accumulation may commonly underlie depressive symptoms in late life.

AbstractBackgroundPositron emission tomography (PET) imaging with [18F]flortaucipir allows for in‐vivo visualization of aggregated tau in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The FDA‐approved label for [18F]flortaucipir PET provides a standardized, clinically applicable definition of tau‐PET positivity by visual interpretation. Here, we studied the concordance between this visual interpretation and quantitative approaches employed in research.MethodWe included 2692 participants (cognitively unimpaired [CU] and impaired [CI, MCI or AD dementia]) from four cohorts (Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and ADRC, ADNI, A4, and A05) with available [18F]flortaucipir PET (mean age: 70.2 y, 50.0% females). Three trained readers assessed each [18F]flortaucipir PET scan according to the FDA‐approved method. Visual reads were compared to an established approach for defining tau‐PET positivity based on SUVR values in a temporal meta‐ROI (Jack, et al. Alzheimers Dement. 2017). Previously defined “lenient” (SUVR = 1.22) and “conservative” (SUVR = 1.30) cut‐points were explored. In addition, visual reads were compared to tau‐PET positivity as defined by a scheme based on the expected spatial progression of tau pathology from the medial temporal lobe (MTL) to the temporal neocortex (NEO) (Ossenkoppele, et al. Nat Med. 2022; cut‐points: SUVRMTL = 1.30, SUVRNEO = 1.37).ResultConcordance between visual and quantitative approaches was limited (Figure 1): the “lenient” and MTL‐NEO methods yielded high rates of quantitative‐positive, visual‐negative scans (73‐52% and 26‐18% for CU and CI, respectively), while the “conservative” cut‐point failed to detect 45% and 13% of the CU and CI visual‐positive scans, respectively. The prevalence of tau‐PET positivity in Aβ‐negative individuals was highest with the “lenient” cut‐point (∼24%) and lowest with visual interpretation (∼3%) (Figure 2). Visual‐positive, quantitative‐negative individuals were more frequently Aβ‐positive than visual‐negative, quantitative‐positive individuals (“lenient”: 86% vs 50%, p<0.001; “conservative”: 87% vs 58%, p<0.001; MTL‐NEO: 85% vs 70%, p = 0.005). Among visually‐positive participants, 164 (28%) showed a tau deposition pattern that deviated from the expected MTL to NEO progression (Figure 3).ConclusionVisual and quantitative methods for [18F]flortaucipir PET are non‐exchangeable. Tau‐PET positivity based on visual interpretation aligns better with Aβ‐pathology. A significant number of visually‐positive participants showed a pattern of tau accumulation that deviated from the expected stereotypical spatial progression and was not detected by standard quantitative methods.

AbstractBackgroundPositron emission tomography (PET) imaging with [18F]flortaucipir allows for in‐vivo visualization of aggregated tau in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The FDA‐approved label for [18F]flortaucipir PET provides a standardized, clinically applicable definition of tau‐PET positivity by visual interpretation. Here, we studied the concordance between this visual interpretation and quantitative approaches employed in research.MethodWe included 2692 participants (cognitively unimpaired [CU] and impaired [CI, MCI or AD dementia]) from four cohorts (Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and ADRC, ADNI, A4, and A05) with available [18F]flortaucipir PET (mean age: 70.2 y, 50.0% females). Three trained readers assessed each [18F]flortaucipir PET scan according to the FDA‐approved method. Visual reads were compared to an established approach for defining tau‐PET positivity based on SUVR values in a temporal meta‐ROI (Jack, et al. Alzheimers Dement. 2017). Previously defined “lenient” (SUVR = 1.22) and “conservative” (SUVR = 1.30) cut‐points were explored. In addition, visual reads were compared to tau‐PET positivity as defined by a scheme based on the expected spatial progression of tau pathology from the medial temporal lobe (MTL) to the temporal neocortex (NEO) (Ossenkoppele, et al. Nat Med. 2022; cut‐points: SUVRMTL = 1.30, SUVRNEO = 1.37).ResultConcordance between visual and quantitative approaches was limited (Figure 1): the “lenient” and MTL‐NEO methods yielded high rates of quantitative‐positive, visual‐negative scans (73‐52% and 26‐18% for CU and CI, respectively), while the “conservative” cut‐point failed to detect 45% and 13% of the CU and CI visual‐positive scans, respectively. The prevalence of tau‐PET positivity in Aß‐negative individuals was highest with the “lenient” cut‐point (∼24%) and lowest with visual interpretation (∼3%) (Figure 2). Visual‐positive, quantitative‐negative individuals were more frequently Aß‐positive than visual‐negative, quantitative‐positive individuals (“lenient”: 86% vs 50%, p<0.001; “conservative”: 87% vs 58%, p<0.001; MTL‐NEO: 85% vs 70%, p = 0.005). Among visually‐positive participants, 164 (28%) showed a tau deposition pattern that deviated from the expected MTL to NEO progression (Figure 3).ConclusionVisual and quantitative methods for [18F]flortaucipir PET are non‐exchangeable. Tau‐PET positivity based on visual interpretation aligns better with Aß‐pathology. A significant number of visually‐positive participants showed a pattern of tau accumulation that deviated from the expected stereotypical spatial progression and was not detected by standard quantitative methods.