Rosas, H. Diana

AbstractBackgroundAlzheimer disease (AD) related cognitive decline occurs at relatively young ages in individuals with Down syndrome (DS, early‐mid 50s) and in those with autosomal dominant mutations (ADAD, 40‐50s). Both groups show similar patterns of amyloid accumulation. We examined if brain volumes are similarly affected by AD pathology in individuals with DS and ADAD.MethodData for cognitively stable and declining participants was obtained from the Alzheimer Biomarker Consortium‐Down Syndrome (ABC‐DS) and the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN). Stability/decline was identified based on cognitive testing and interview of individuals and caregivers by trained assessors. Cognitively stable family members without DS/ADAD mutations were recruited as controls from both studies. Participants underwent MRI and amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) scans from which brain volumes and amyloid (centiloids) were derived, respectively. Participants from DIAN had Pittsburgh Compound‐B (PIB) scans, ABC‐DS had PIB or florbetapir. Nonlinear cross‐sectional associations between regional brain volumes and estimated years to onset of cognitive decline (EYO, negative values before onset, positive after) and centiloid were evaluated using generalized additive models while controlling for sex and random effects of family. EYO was set to 52 for all participants with DS and based on parental decline/mutation type for participants with ADAD. EYO for controls was based on the EYO of their family member.ResultData from 239 participants with DS (47 declining), and 340 participants with ADAD (122 declining), and 263 familial controls were included. Higher EYO and centiloid values were associated with lower brain volumes in almost all regions. At earlier EYOs, individuals with DS typically had smaller regional volumes than ADAD or sibling controls, with volume declining linearly across the EYO range. By contrast, ADAD mutation carriers had similar volumes to non‐carriers at early EYOs, with volumes diverging as early as 10 years before decline. Brain volumes and centiloid values were inversely related in ADAD and DSAD. Volume in key cortical regions were similar by the expected year of onset in both groups.ConclusionADAD and DSAD demonstrated different temporal patterns of regional neurodegeneration prior to cognitive change despite being similarly affected by early onset amyloid.

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.

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.