Chen, Charles D.

AbstractBackgroundAdults 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.MethodIn 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.ResultCompared 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).ConclusionWhile 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.

AbstractBackgroundDisease‐modifying therapies for Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) are likely most beneficial when initiated in the pre‐symptomatic phase. To track success of such interventions fluid biomarkers became instrumental, with neurofilament light chain (NfL) showing particular promise. We previously reported that serum NfL increases in pre‐symptomatic phases of familial (autosomal‐dominantly inherited) AD (fAD) and that within‐person rate‐of‐change in NfL is an earlier predictor of fAD symptom onset compared to cross‐sectional levels. The aim of the study at hand was to extend these initial findings in a larger cohort.MethodParticipants enrolled in the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN) with matched cross‐sectional and longitudinal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF; n = 962) as well as plasma (n = 1294) samples were used. NfL measurements have been performed on the SIMOA platform using commercially available assay‐kits. To investigate the influence of physiological factors independent from AD, we first analyzed whether age and body mass index (BMI) could account for observed variation in inter‐individual CSF and plasma NfL levels considering non‐carrier family‐members (NC) as a healthy control group. Next, utilizing estimated years to symptom onset (EYO) and previously published methods (Preische et al., 2019), we determined the point in disease course when baseline and longitudinal CSF and plasma NfL concentrations started to increase in mutation carriers (MC) relative to NC, after adjusting for age and BMI.ResultOur results reveal a tight correlation of CSF and blood NfL values within MC as well as NC (figure 1A‐B). However, within NC, after correction for age and BMI, some unexplained variability remained (figure 1C). Further, a decrease of the NfL plasma/CSF ratio over age was found after correcting for BMI (figure 1D). The discrimination of MC from NC was equally good for plasma compared to CSF, being possible on the group level as early as around ‐15 to almost ‐20 EYO depending on the modelling (figure 2).ConclusionOur results support plasma equivalently to CSF NfL as a clinically useful biomarker to longitudinally track neurodegeneration in fAD. The systemic factors influencing physiological NfL values in blood should be investigated in future studies to further improve interpretation of this biomarker.

AbstractAlthough pathogenic variants in PSEN1 leading to autosomal‐dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) are highly penetrant, substantial interindividual variability in the rates of cognitive decline and biomarker change are observed in ADAD. We hypothesized that this interindividual variability may be associated with the location of the pathogenic variant within PSEN1. PSEN1 pathogenic variant carriers participating in the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN) observational study were grouped based on whether the underlying variant affects a transmembrane (TM) or cytoplasmic (CY) protein domain within PSEN1. CY and TM carriers and variant non‐carriers (NC) who completed clinical evaluation, multimodal neuroimaging, and lumbar puncture for collection of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) as part of their participation in DIAN were included in this study. Linear mixed effects models were used to determine differences in clinical, cognitive, and biomarker measures between the NC, TM, and CY groups. While both the CY and TM groups were found to have similarly elevated Aβ compared to NC, TM carriers had greater cognitive impairment, smaller hippocampal volume, and elevated phosphorylated tau levels across the spectrum of pre‐symptomatic and symptomatic phases of disease as compared to CY, using both cross‐sectional and longitudinal data. As distinct portions of PSEN1 are differentially involved in APP processing by γ‐secretase and the generation of toxic β‐amyloid species, these results have important implications for understanding the pathobiology of ADAD and accounting for a substantial portion of the interindividual heterogeneity in ongoing ADAD clinical trials.

AbstractBackgroundGiven 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.MethodWe 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.ResultThe 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).ConclusionThese 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.

AbstractBackgroundRates of cognitive and biomarker change in Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) vary substantially across individuals. Prior cross‐sectional work suggests that the location of the pathogenic variant within PSEN1, specifically whether the underlying variant affects transmembrane (TM) or cytoplasmic (CY) domains in PSEN1, may be a key determinant in these differential rates of progression. Here we use longitudinal data from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network observational study (DIAN‐Obs) to examine whether variants affecting TM versus CY domains in PSEN1 have differential rates of change in key cognitive and neurodegenerative markers, and whether these differences are relevant to ADAD clinical trials.MethodsUsing longitudinal clinical, cognitive, and MRI data from PSEN1 pathogenic variant carriers [TM group N=76 and CY group N=44; Table 1], we assessed rates of change in Mini‐Mental State Exam (MMSE), Clinical Dementia Rating® Sum of Boxes (CDR®‐SOB), and hippocampal volume (HV) using linear mixed effects models accounting for disease stage (estimated years to symptom onset [EYO]). We further assessed how PSEN1 mutation location (TM versus CY) impacts sample size and detectable effect size in a potential ADAD clinical trial (modeled as a 4‐year trial with annual assessments; 80% power; α = 0.05).ResultsPSEN1 TM and PSEN1 CY groups did not differ on baseline age, EYO, or CDR®. The PSEN1 TM group had significantly greater rates of change on MMSE (B[SE] = ‐0.42[0.1], p=0.002), CDR®‐SOB (B[SE] = 0.23[0.1], p=0.001), and HV atrophy (B[SE] = ‐58.93[14.3], p=0.0006 compared to the PSEN1 CY group (Fig.1). Consistent with these differential rates of change, power analyses indicated the required sample size to detect a 30% treatment effect on MMSE or HV would be reduced by 59.6% for MMSE and 91.0% for HV for a trial population comprised of PSEN1 TM versus CY carriers (Fig.2).ConclusionsIndividuals who had a variant affecting the transmembrane domains of PSEN1 had greater rates of cognitive decline and neurodegeneration compared to those with variants affecting cytoplasmic domains. In addition to having implications for ADAD pathophysiology, these results suggest that incorporating information regarding the location of PSEN1 variants may be beneficial in analyzing and designing stratification approaches for ADAD trials.

AbstractBackgroundRates of cognitive and biomarker change in Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) vary substantially across individuals. Prior cross‐sectional work suggests that the location of the pathogenic variant within PSEN1, specifically whether the underlying variant affects transmembrane (TM) or cytoplasmic (CY) domains in PSEN1, may be a key determinant in these differential rates of progression. Here we use longitudinal data from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network observational study (DIAN‐Obs) to examine whether variants affecting TM versus CY domains in PSEN1 have differential rates of change in key cognitive and neurodegenerative markers, and whether these differences are relevant to ADAD clinical trials.MethodsUsing longitudinal clinical, cognitive, and MRI data from PSEN1 pathogenic variant carriers [TM group N=76 and CY group N=44; Table 1], we assessed rates of change in Mini‐Mental State Exam (MMSE), Clinical Dementia Rating® Sum of Boxes (CDR®‐SOB), and hippocampal volume (HV) using linear mixed effects models accounting for disease stage (estimated years to symptom onset [EYO]). We further assessed how PSEN1 mutation location (TM versus CY) impacts sample size and detectable effect size in a potential ADAD clinical trial (modeled as a 4‐year trial with annual assessments; 80% power; α = 0.05).Results PSEN1 TM and PSEN1 CY groups did not differ on baseline age, EYO, or CDR®. The PSEN1 TM group had significantly greater rates of change on MMSE (B[SE] = ‐0.42[0.1], p=0.002), CDR®‐SOB (B[SE] = 0.23[0.1], p=0.001), and HV atrophy (B[SE] = ‐58.93[14.3], p=0.0006 compared to the PSEN1 CY group (Fig.1). Consistent with these differential rates of change, power analyses indicated the required sample size to detect a 30% treatment effect on MMSE or HV would be reduced by 59.6% for MMSE and 91.0% for HV for a trial population comprised of PSEN1 TM versus CY carriers (Fig.2).ConclusionsIndividuals who had a variant affecting the transmembrane domains of PSEN1 had greater rates of cognitive decline and neurodegeneration compared to those with variants affecting cytoplasmic domains. In addition to having implications for ADAD pathophysiology, these results suggest that incorporating information regarding the location of PSEN1 variants may be beneficial in analyzing and designing stratification approaches for ADAD trials.

AbstractBackgroundGiven 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.MethodWe 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.ResultThe 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).ConclusionThese 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.

ObjectiveTo determine the characteristics of participants with amyloid‐related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) in a trial of gantenerumab or solanezumab in dominantly inherited Alzheimer disease (DIAD).Methods142 DIAD mutation carriers received either gantenerumab SC (n = 52), solanezumab IV (n = 50), or placebo (n = 40). Participants underwent assessments with the Clinical Dementia Rating® (CDR®), neuropsychological testing, CSF biomarkers, β‐amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to monitor ARIA. Cross‐sectional and longitudinal analyses evaluated potential ARIA‐related risk factors.ResultsEleven participants developed ARIA‐E, including 3 with mild symptoms. No ARIA‐E was reported under solanezumab while gantenerumab was associated with ARIA‐E compared to placebo (odds ratio [OR] = 9.1, confidence interval [CI][1.2, 412.3]; p = 0.021). Under gantenerumab, APOE‐ɛ4 carriers were more likely to develop ARIA‐E (OR = 5.0, CI[1.0, 30.4]; p = 0.055), as were individuals with microhemorrhage at baseline (OR = 13.7, CI[1.2, 163.2]; p = 0.039). No ARIA‐E was observed at the initial 225 mg/month gantenerumab dose, and most cases were observed at doses >675 mg. At first ARIA‐E occurrence, all ARIA‐E participants were amyloid‐PET+, 60% were CDR >0, 60% were past their estimated year to symptom onset, and 60% had also incident ARIA‐H. Most ARIA‐E radiologically resolved after dose adjustment and developing ARIA‐E did not significantly increase odds of trial discontinuation. ARIA‐E was more frequently observed in the occipital lobe (90%). ARIA‐E severity was associated with age at time of ARIA‐E.InterpretationIn DIAD, solanezumab was not associated with ARIA. Gantenerumab dose over 225 mg increased ARIA‐E risk, with additional risk for individuals APOE‐ɛ4(+) or with microhemorrhage. ARIA‐E was reversible on MRI in most cases, generally asymptomatic, without additional risk for trial discontinuation. ANN NEUROL 2022;92:729–744

AbstractBackgroundAmyloid‐related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), edema (E) or hemorrhagic (H) type, have been reported in trials of anti‐β‐amyloid passive immunotherapies in sporadic and dominantly inherited Alzheimer Disease (DIAD). However, beyond APOE‐ɛ4 the risk factors and clinical implications of ARIA are not well understood, especially in DIAD populations. Here we characterize ARIA, focusing on ARIA‐E in the DIAN‐TU‐001 trial evaluating gantenerumab and solanezumab in DIAD.MethodThe DIAN‐TU‐001 trial enrolled 194 participants, including 144 DIAD mutation‐carriers receiving gantenerumab (n=52), solanezumab (n=52), or a placebo (n=40). Clinical assessments included the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). Imaging assessments included PiB‐PET and safety MR, including T2‐FLAIR and T2*‐GRE. Treatment dosage and APOE‐ɛ4 status were also reported.ResultEleven participants developed a total of 14 ARIA‐E episodes (discovered on scheduled safety MR) and three had associated mild symptoms reported in retrospect (e.g. headache, imbalance disorder). Though one ARIA‐E case was observed in the solanezumab arm, the following results focus on the gantenerumab arm to prevent unblinding. Recipients of gantenerumab were more likely to develop ARIA‐E compared to placebo (odds ratio (OR)=9.29, 95% confidence interval (CI)=[1.1,75.9], p‐value<0.05). ARIA‐E participants were PiB‐PET+ and 60% were CDR>0. APOE‐ɛ4 tends to be associated with risk for developing ARIA‐E (OR=5.0, 95%CI=[1.0,30.4], p‐value=0.055). ARIA‐E were not observed at initial 225mg dose and were first observed after a titration step (within 4‐24 weeks, after 1‐6 injections, Table 1). Time‐to‐resolution of ARIA‐E was 10.4±6.2weeks. Seven of ten ARIA‐E patients paused/reduced dose escalation and three discontinued treatment. Overall, developing ARIA‐E did not increase the odds of trial discontinuation (OR=1.57, 95%CI=[0.34,7.33], p‐value=0.57). ARIA‐E occurred primarily in the occipital lobe (71%) with associated incident ARIA‐H (microhemorrhages or superficial siderosis) in 60% of ARIA‐E participants. ARIA‐E size was associated with microhemorrhage count (Spearman’s rho=0.72, p‐value<0.05), rate of change (rho=0.78, p‐value<0.01), and baseline PiB‐PET (rho=0.68, p‐value<0.05). Normalizing by baseline, PiB‐PET decreased similarly in ARIA‐E+ (‐0.21±0.20) and ARIA‐E‐ (‐0.16±0.20) participants.ConclusionIn DIAD, gantenerumab dose over 225mg increased ARIA‐E risk, possibly more for APOE‐ɛ4 carriers. ARIA‐E was reversible, generally asymptomatic, and without increased odds of trial discontinuation. These aspects of drug response give insights for managing ARIA‐E occurrence in future trials.