Boeve, Bradley F.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONThe implications of positive tau positron emission tomography (T) with negative beta amyloid positron emission tomography (A) are not well understood. We investigated cognitive performance in participants who were T+ but A‐.METHODSWe evaluated 98 participants from the Mayo Clinic who were T+ and A‐. Participants were matched 2:1 to A‐ and T‐ cognitively unimpaired (CU) controls. Cognitive test scores were compared between different groups.RESULTSThe A‐T+ group demonstrated lower performance than the A‐T‐ group on the Mini‐Mental Status Exam (MMSE) (p < 0.001), Wechsler Memory Scale‐Revised Logical Memory I (p < 0.001) and Logical Memory II (p < 0.001), Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT) delayed recall (p = 0.004), category fluency (animals p = 0.005; vegetables p = 0.021), Trail Making Test A and B (p < 0.001), and others. There were no significant differences in demographic features or apolipoprotein E (APOE) e4 genotype between CU A‐T+ and CI A‐T+.DISCUSSIONA‐T+ participants show an association with lower cognitive performance.

AbstractBackgroundWe aimed to validate the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR®) dementia staging instrument plus the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Centre Behaviour and Language Domains (CDR® plus NACC FTLD) for use in clinical settings in Japan and in the Japanese language.MethodsThis prospective observational study enrolled 29 patients with frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and 21 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia from the Departments of Psychiatry at Osaka University Hospital and Asakayama General Hospital and the Brain Function Centre at Nippon Life Hospital. CDR® plus NACC FTLD, CDR®, Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE), Western Aphasia Battery (WAB), Neuropsychiatric Inventory‐plus (NPI‐plus), Stereotypy Rating Inventory (SRI), and frontal behavioural symptom scores obtained from items of NPI‐plus and SRI, were conducted to assess inter‐ and intra‐rater reliability, validity, and responsiveness. We performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to evaluate the discriminating power of the Behaviour/Comportment/Personality (BEHAV) and Language (LANG) domains of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD and the MEMORY domain of the CDR® in patients AD dementia and FTD.ResultsThe CDR® plus NACC FTLD showed good inter‐ and intra‐rater reliabilities. In patients with FTD, the BEHAV domain of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD was significantly correlated with all clinical measures except for the SRI total score, while the LANG domain of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD was significantly correlated with the MMSE and the WAB‐Aphasia quotient. In addition, the CDR® plus NACC FTLD sum of boxes significantly changed after 6 months and after 1 year. ROC curve analysis showed that the BEHAV and LANG domains of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD distinguished between patients with AD dementia and FTD better than the MEMORY domain of the CDR®.ConclusionsThis study validated the Japanese version of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD with good reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

AbstractBackgroundDecreased image self‐similarity of repeated FDG‐PET scans has been suggested to indicate increased risk for disease progression. Here, we compared several self‐similarity measures based on conventionally used voxel‐ and ROI‐based approaches and those based on patterns of cortical metabolism.MethodFrom the MCSA/ADRC, we included 376 cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals and those with a clinical diagnosis of MCI (n = 55) or AD (n = 20) who had two FDG‐PET images within 2‐3 years and clinical follow‐up available. We compared image self‐similarity for three approaches: voxel, ROI and “eigenbrain” (Fig.1). For the voxel approach, FDG‐PET images were normalized to template space, grey matter masked, and intensity normalized to the pons to create standard uptake value ratios (SUVR) for each voxel. From these images, mean SUVR were extracted for 122 ROIs (MCALT‐ADIR122) for the ROI approach. For the “eigenbrain” approach, the SUVR images were transformed to a latent space embedding composed of 253 components (“eigenbrains”) and reflecting metabolism patterns, that was generated in an independent sample of 7008 FDG‐PET images. For each approach, image self‐similarity between baseline and follow‐up values (voxel, ROI or eigenbrain) was determined using three metrics (Pearson correlation, cosine, Euclidean distance). We computed AUC to determine which approach and metric would best discriminate between groups. We used Cox regression analyses to assess whether the metrics could predict disease progression.ResultComparing each distance metric across approaches, AUC was highest in differentiating clinical diagnoses using self‐similarity measures based on eigenbrains, then voxels, then ROIs (e.g., Euclidean distance CU vs AD AUC eigenbrain: 0.86, voxel: 0.75, ROI: 0.71; Fig.1). Across all approaches, Euclidean distance always discriminated best between classes. Eigenbrain‐based Euclidean distance was associated with risk for progression to MCI in CU (HR [95%CI]: 1.25 [1.05, 1.49]), and eigenbrain‐based cosine and Euclidean distances were associated with risk for progression to AD in MCI (1.61 [1.1, 2.34] and 1.53 [1.01, 2.31], respectively), while we found no associations for voxel‐ or ROI‐based distance measures.ConclusionEigenbrain‐based measures outperformed other, more conventional approaches in discriminating clinical diagnoses, and were associated with risk for disease progression. Our results suggest that decreased self‐similarity in metabolism patterns informs on disease stage and prognosis.

AbstractBackgroundThe implications of a positive tau (T) Positron Emission Tomography (PET) with a negative beta amyloid (A) PET are not well understood. We investigated cognitive performance in participants who were positive on tau PET but negative on beta amyloid PET.MethodWe evaluated 98 participants from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA) and the Mayo Clinic Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center (ADRC) who were positive for Flortaucipir (FTP) and negative for PiB PET. Participants were classified as A‐ and T+ based on Standardized Uptake Value Ratios (SUVr) of FTP and PiB PET scans, and were matched 2:1 to amyloid negative and tau negative cognitively unimpaired controls from the MCSA. Cognitive test scores were compared between the combined ADRC/MCSA group and MCSA only group. We also examined clinical diagnoses in our cohort. The most common were Alzheimer’s Disease, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) and Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) amongst others.ResultThere were no significant differences in demographic features or PiB SUVr between groups. There were significant differences in APOE genotype between groups. In the combined ADRC/MCSA group, 25% of A‐T‐ and 13% of A‐T+ were APOE e4 carriers (p = 0.016), and in the MCSA only group, 27% of A‐T‐and 10% of A‐T+ were APOE e4 carriers (p = 0.010). In the combined ADRC/MCSA group, the A‐T+ group demonstrated lower performance than the A‐T‐ group on the Mini Mental Status Exam (MMSE) (p<0.001), Wechsler Memory Scale‐Revised Logical Memory I (p<0.001) and Logical Memory II (p<0.001), Auditory verbal Learning Test Delayed Recall (AVLT) (p = 0.004), Category fluency animals (p = 0.005), Category fluency vegetables (p = 0.021), Trailmaking test A (p<0.001), Trail making test B (p<0.001), Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale‐IV (WAIS‐IV) (p = 0.002), and Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale part III (UPDRS III) (p = 0.003). In the MCSA only group, the A‐T+ group had lower scores on Logical Memory II (p = 0.022), AVLT delated recall (p = 0.04), and WAIS‐R block design (p = 0.035) compared to the A‐T‐group.ConclusionPositive tau PET in the absence of beta‐amyloid positivity is associated with lower cognitive performance.

AbstractBackgroundThe rural‐urban commuting area (RUCA) codes classify communities using measures of population density, urbanization, and daily commuting from U.S. Census Bureau information. The ARTFL LEFFTDS Longitudinal Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ALLFTD) study generated RUCA codes for enrolled participants to better understand our cohort demographics. The rural‐urban distribution of participants may provide important insights for clinical trial planning.MethodsThe current RUCA codes are generated from the 2010 decennial census and the 2006‐10 American Community Survey data. The codes are numbers (1‐10) that describe metropolitan, micropolitan, small town, and rural commuting areas based on the size and direction of the primary (largest) commuting flows.ResultsRUCA codes were generated on 784 ALLFTD participants. At their most recent visit, participant median age was 60, 51.1% female, and a median education of 16 years. Participants were classified as clinically normal (39.1%), behavioral variant FTD (25%), nonfluent PPA (6.7%), semantic variant PPA (6.6%), PSP (4.7%), MBCI (4.8%), corticobasal syndrome (5.9%), and the remaining 7% of participants had other dementia‐related diagnoses. For participants with sporadic disease, 87.4% live in a metropolitan area, 6.7% a micropolitan area, 3.2% a small‐town area, and 3.2% live in a rural area. In familial FTLD, a larger percentage of participants live in micropolitan or small town/rural community (18.8% combined; p = 0.029), driven largely by MAPT family participants (n = 101). 10% of those with a familial MAPT mutation live in a rural area; with an additional 18% in micropolitan (12.9%) or small‐town areas (5%). Among those with a familial C9orf72 expansion, 83.3% live in a metropolitan area, 8.9% micropolitan area, 5.6% in a small‐town area, and 2.2% in a rural area. Participants with a familial GRN mutation show a similar distribution: 84.7% live in a metropolitan area, 5.6% micropolitan, 6.9% small‐town, 2.8% rural.ConclusionsAdditional analyses to better understand if FTD families are disproportionately living in rural communities are underway. These analyses will better characterize sporadic and familial FTD demographics to assist with clinical trial design.

AbstractBackgroundCardiovascular health plays an important role in brain aging; yet its role in development of autosomal dominant forms of dementia and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) has not been fully elucidated. Life’s Simple 7 (LS7) is a metric of cardiovascular health associated with reduced dementia risk and may represent a transdiagnostic heuristic to promote brain health. We examined the extent to which baseline LS7 associated with cognitive and brain aging trajectories in individuals with genetic FTD.Method243 adults carrying autosomal dominant genetic mutations for FTD and 189 non‐carriers completed neuroimaging, neuropsychological testing, and medical interviews. LS7 at baseline was computed following established procedures based on physical activity, diet, body mass index, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, and hypercholesterolemia; higher scores indicate more optimal cardiovascular health. We examined interactions between baseline LS7 and mutation carrier status on cognitive and brain structural outcomes at baseline (via linear regression) and longitudinally (via linear mixed‐effects models). All models adjusted for baseline age, sex, and education, and CDR®+NACC FTLD.ResultMutation carriers and non‐carriers did not significantly differ on baseline LS7 (t = ‐1.42, p = 0.156). At baseline, there were significant interactions between LS7 and carrier status on frontotemporal (FTL) volume and executive functioning (all p‐values<0.046), such that positive associations between LS7 and neurobehavioral outcomes were stronger among mutation carriers versus noncarriers. Longitudinally, there was also a significant interaction between carrier status and baseline LS7 on memory over time (b = 0.04,p = 0.035) and the interaction approached significance for language trajectories (b = 0.03,p = 0.079); again, the association between higher LS7 and slower cognitive decline was stronger among mutation carriers versus noncarriers, even when excluding symptomatic carriers (b = 0.04,p = 0.047). Among mutation carriers only, higher baseline LS7 related to slower memory (b = 0.04,p = 0.006) and language declines over time (b = 0.044,p = 0.004), but did not significantly relate to FTL volume (b = ‐0.01,p = 0.307) or executive functioning trajectories (b = 0.004,p = 0.913)ConclusionBetter cardiovascular health relates to larger baseline frontotemporal volume and slower cognitive decline in individuals with autosomal dominant FTD. Interaction models suggested the degree to which cardiovascular health associates with better neurobehavioral outcomes is stronger in mutation carriers. Optimizing cardiovascular health may be a particularly important, modifiable approach to mitigate the symptoms associated with pathogenic variants of FTD.

AbstractBackgroundNo specific clinical rating scale currently exists for Lewy body dementia (LBD). Clinical rating scales developed for other diseases are therefore used instead for LBD clinical trials. However, these scales are not optimized for LBD and may not sufficiently reflect the complex array of LBD‐related phenomenology, making it more difficult to interpret outcome data from LBD clinical trials.MethodA working group comprised of 14 members bridging various international LBD‐focused research groups was convened to develop the first iteration of the LBD‐DRS with a focus on inclusion of key LBD related symptom domains, ensuring that any scale is mapped to regulatory expectations, and an emphasis on being patient‐centered. This draft was then subsequently presented to a broader stakeholder group (»50 participants) at the International Lewy body Dementia Conference in June 2022 for further feedback, leading to a further iteration of the scale.ResultThe LBD‐DRS has been designed to capture ratings of the frequency and severity of symptoms across the key domains relevant to LBD – cognitive, neuropsychiatric, motor, autonomic and sleep – as well as the functional impact and perceived burden of symptoms for patients and their care partners. An international Delphi exercise is now planned with many LBD‐relevant stakeholders, which will be coupled with workgroup engagement (for example, with patient‐caregiver groups) to further develop the scale with the resulting final draft anticipated for pilot use in the near future.ConclusionsIn this presentation we will elaborate on the development of the scale, key areas that it will cover as well as challenge points and next steps. Upon completion of the development and refinement of the LBD‐DRS, we propose that this scale will have utility as valid and LBD specific outcome measure in LBD clinical trials.

Abstract Background The ALLFTD (ARTFL‐LEFFTDS Longitudinal Frontemporal Lobar Degeneration) study is an NIH‐funded effort to prepare for clinical trials in sporadic (s‐FTLD) and familial (f‐FTLD) FTLD syndromes by characterizing cohorts, developing new clinical trial outcome measures, and evaluating disease progression. ALLFTD represents the merger and continuation of two prior studies: Advancing Research and Treatment of Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ARTFL) and Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Frontotemporal Dementia Subjects (LEFFTDS). Methods ALLFTD recruits participants with FTLD spectrum disorders (bvFTD, svPPA, nfvPPA, FTD‐ALS, CBS or PSP), with strong family histories of FTLD, or known FTLD‐associated genetic variants within the family. 26 sites in North America enroll participants for clinical and neuropsychological evaluations, MR Imaging, blood draws, and CSF collection in willing participants; participants are requested to return annually for follow‐up evaluation. All participants are genotyped for dementia‐associated mutations. Participants also enroll in the FTD Disorders Registry for follow‐up surveys. A subset of participants undergo remote assessment via the ALLFTD app. Visits conducted under ARTFL and LEFFTDS are included in the ALLFTD dataset. Results ALLFTD has been successful in developing methods to conduct remote or hybrid visits and in actively evaluating participants. Since ALLFTD began in January 2020, 1034 participants (736 new; 298 previously enrolled in ARTFL or LEFFTDS) have been evaluated in the longitudinal arm; an additional 119 participants have been participated in a shortened, biofluid‐focused visit. 349 have returned for follow‐up visits. Including prior participants, the ALLFTD dataset contains 3871 visits from 2343 individuals. 1277 people have sporadic syndromes; 1045 were enrolled as familial. Among s‐FTLD, bvFTD is the most common phenotype (32.8%) followed by PSP (15.9%). 61.4% of f‐FTLD participants were clinically normal at first visit; bvFTD is the most common syndrome in symptomatic f‐FTLD (40%). 477 are confirmed carriers of FTLD‐associated genetic mutations. MRIs were obtained for 2594 visits; 3492 visits have associated blood biospecimens banked; 978 visits have associated CSF samples. Conclusions The ALLFTD consortium is actively evaluating participants across North America to better characterize FTLD syndromes and support the planning and development of FTLD clinical trials. Longitudinal datasets including clinical, genetic, and imaging data are available by request.

AbstractBackgroundFrontotemporal Dementia (FTD) patients are geographically dispersed and often have behavioral and/or motor deficits that limit access to in‐person clinical trials and research. To address these participation barriers, we investigated the feasibility of installing in‐home sensor technologies to remotely assess everyday functioning in FTD.MethodWe aimed to recruit 20 FTD participants with a variety of clinical syndromes, including behavioral variant FTD (bvFTD), primary progressive aphasia (PPA), corticobasal syndrome (CBS), and progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). We also aimed to enroll a study partner for each participant that lived in the same home to serve as a control. The Collaborative Aging Research Using Technology (CART) platform was installed in participants’ homes to collect continuous data for up to two years, using motion sensors, physiological monitoring devices (e.g., scales, sleep sensors), electronic pillboxes, and wearable actigraphs. Computer use and driving patterns were also tracked. Technology was installed either via a study coordinator visit or remotely through video and written instructions, based on schedule and logistics. Participants were asked to complete a weekly Qualtrics survey about time away from home, visitors, and health changes.ResultOf the 159 UCSF participants available for recruitment through ALLFTD and other FTD projects, 28% (N = 45) met inclusion criteria. Of those 45, ten were ineligible due to advanced disease severity or relocation to an assisted living facility. A third (36%, N = 17) declined due to overwhelmed study partners (N = 3), declined any subproject participation (N = 7), sensitivity to participant’s diagnosis (N = 2), or lack of response (N = 5). Two additional participants were recruited through UCLA’s ALLFTD cohort. The platform has been installed in 19 homes (bvFTD: n = 10; PPA: n = 5; CBS/PSP: n = 4). Two homes discontinued due to death or relocation to assisted living facility. Mean data collection is 360 days (max = 527). Of 103 reported technological issues, 92% were resolved without additional home visits, either by phone or email. Participants completed 65% of weekly health questionnaires.ConclusionsAlthough there were some recruitment and retention challenges, these findings generally provide preliminary support for the feasibility and sustainability of conducting comprehensive in‐home passive data research in FTD.

AbstractBackgroundThere has been a rise in remote cognitive testing for neurodegenerative diseases. The ALLFTD Mobile App is designed to capture clinical features of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) through repeated remote assessment on smartphones. This is a departure from traditional neuropsychological practice in which a single examiner‐led assessment occurs in a controlled setting. When participants complete tasks on their own, those with greater disease severity may be more variable in their performance for a variety of reasons (e.g. greater distractibility, less engagement). Here we study whether intraindividual cognitive variability (IIV) is associated with older age and increasing disease severity.MethodParticipants were 279 (mean age = 54.9) healthy controls and participants with sporadic FTD or from familial FTD kindreds with a range of disease severities based on FTLD Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD Global) scores: 0 (n = 132), 0.5 (n = 54), and ≥1 (n = 47). Participants completed three cognitive tasks at least two times across twelve days. Measures included an adaptive memory task and gamified versions of Flanker and Go/no‐go tasks. IIV was operationalized as the standard deviation in performance on each task. Regression analyses investigated the relationship of IIV with CDR®+NACC‐FTLD group, and with age in those without symptoms. Education and gender were included as covariates in all analyses.ResultGreater disease severity (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD) was associated with greater variability on Flanker (p<.001) and Go/No‐go (p = .02) tasks; a positive but non‐significant association was seen with memory testing (p = .16). Post‐hoc comparisons found that those with CDR®+NACC‐FTLD of 0.5 had significantly more IIV on the Flanker task (𝛃 = .39, p = .004) than those with CDR®+NACC‐FTLD’s of 0. Moreover, those with a CDR®+NACC‐FTLD ≥1 had significantly greater IIV on the Flanker (𝛃 = .85, p<.001) and Go/No‐go tasks (𝛃 = .51, p = .007) than those with a CDR®+NACC‐FTLD of 0. In those without symptoms (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0), age was associated with increased IIV on the Flanker (𝛃 = .27, p<.001) and Go/no‐go (𝛃 = .23, p<.001) tasks.ConclusionIncreased IIV, particularly on processing speed/executive functioning tasks, was associated with greater age and greater functional impairment, even in the mildest stages. Future investigations exploring predictors of IIV and the prognostic value of IIV are warranted.