Back to Authors

Lovato, Laura

Mayo Clinic

Wake Forest University Health Sciences

Citations 3

Brain Imaging Biomarkers and Cognitive Outcomes in a Multidomain Lifestyle Intervention
Harrison, Theresa M., Harvey, Danielle J., Chadwick, Trevor, Chao, Yishu , Taggett, Jacinda , Maillard, Pauline, Lovato, Laura, Farias, Sarah, Papp, Kathryn V., Lockhart, Samuel N., Toga, Arthur W., Koeppe, Robert A., Jagust, William J., Whitmer, Rachel A., Snyder, Heather M. , Carrillo, Maria C., Baker, Laura D. , Espeland, Mark A., Vemuri, Prashanthi, DeCarli, Charles, Landau, Susan M., Harvey, Danielle , Carrillo, María C. , Harvey, Danielle J , Harrison, Theresa M. , Maillard, Pauline , Lovato, Laura, Farias, Sarah Tomaszewski , Papp, Kathryn V. , Lockhart, Samuel N. , Toga, Arthur W. , Koeppe, Robert A. , Jung, Youngkyoo , Jagust, William J. , Whitmer, Rachel A. , Espeland, Mark Andrew , Vemuri, Prashanthi , DeCarli, Charles , Landau, Susan

JAMA Neurology | April 20, 2026 | Volume: 83 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 521

10.1001/jamaneurol.2026.0832 Get It

Importance Brain imaging biomarkers may (1) identify underlying mechanisms of intervention effects and (2) define brain characteristics of those most likely to benefit cognitively from the intervention. Objective To test whether (1) a lifestyle intervention is related to brain changes, (2) brain changes are correlated with intervention-specific cognition changes, and (3) brain imaging biomarkers provide information about who is likely to benefit from a lifestyle intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants In this randomized clinical trial, the POINTER Imaging study was an ancillary study of the 2-year, single-blind multicenter US POINTER clinical trial in which neuroimaging data were collected on eligible enrolled participants. The study was conducted from May 2019 to March 2023 (final follow-up, May 14, 2025). Participants were enrolled into the POINTER Imaging study following a standard procedure at 5 clinical sites in the US. Participant eligibility criteria included an age of 60 to 79 years, sedentary lifestyle, and suboptimal diet, plus at least 2 additional risk criteria for cognitive decline and no contraindications for neuroimaging. Interventions Participants were randomly assigned to receive the structured or self-guided intervention. Both interventions emphasized increased physical and cognitive activity, healthy nutrition, social engagement, and cardiovascular health monitoring, but they differed in intensity and accountability. Main Outcomes and Measures There were 4 primary imaging outcomes: global β-amyloid (Aβ) burden, tau burden in the entorhinal cortex (ERC), hippocampal (HC) volume, and white matter hyperintensity volume. The primary cognitive measure was a global cognitive composite. Results Among 1943 parent trial participants who were assessed for eligibility, 983 underwent at least 1 magnetic resonance imaging or positron emission tomography scanning session. The mean (SD) age was 68.4 (5.2) years; 605 participants (61.5%) were female and 378 male (38.5%). Five hundred sixteen participants received the structured intervention and 467 the self-guided intervention. There were no intervention group differences in longitudinal cognitive or imaging outcomes. Intervention group differences were not associated with or moderated by Aβ status or accumulation. There was a negative association between change in ERC tau and change in global cognition in the self-guided group that was attenuated in the structured group (difference in association: 0.289; 95% CI, 0.029 to 0.550; interaction P = .03). Lower baseline HC volume was associated with greater cognitive benefit for participants in the structured group vs the self-guided group (lower HC: 0.077 SD; 95% CI, 0.022 to 0.132; higher HC: 0.002 SD; 95% CI, −0.037 to 0.041; interaction P = .03). Conclusion and Relevance This study found that a high-intensity multidomain lifestyle intervention did not affect brain biomarker trajectories and was not associated with Aβ pathology, but older adults with specific at-risk brain characteristics, including lower baseline HC volume, showed a greater cognitive benefit of the structured intervention. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03688126
Cohort heterogeneity and AD biomarkers in older adults without significant cognitive impairment: A comparison of U.S. POINTER and ADNI
Landau, Susan , Baker, Suzanne L. , Lovato, Laura, Masdeu, Joseph C. , Oh, Hwamee , Aggarwal, Neelum T. , Farias, Sarah Tomaszewski , Snyder, Heather M. , Jagust, William J. , Initiative, U.S. POINTER Study Group and the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging, Harrison, Theresa M. , Ward, Tyler J. , Koeppe, Robert A. , Vemuri, Prashanthi , Lockhart, Samuel N. , Jung, Youngkyoo , Harvey, Danielle , Toga, Arthur W. , Masdeu, Joseph C , Gitelman, Darren R. , Papp, Kathryn V. , Baker, Laura D. , DeCarli, Charles , Initiative, U.S. POINTER Study Group and the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging

Alzheimer's & Dementia | December 25, 2023 | Volume: 19 | Issue: S16 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.080245 Get It

AbstractBackgroundA key focus of the U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is recruitment of unimpaired older individuals at risk for cognitive decline with heterogeneous characteristics (under‐represented racial and ethnicity groups (URG), family history of cognitive decline, hypertension, geographic diversity), and a subset of individuals undergo PET and MRI.MethodTo examine effects of heterogeneity on relationships between risk factors, AD biomarkers (Aβ and entorhinal tau PET, hippocampal volume (HV)) and cognition (global, executive function, and memory) were examined from U.S. POINTER neuroimaging participants (N = 602, about 65% of the anticipated total sample) and a subset of Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative participants (N = 503). Neuroimaging data were processed and analyzed using harmonized methods across studies. Some cohort‐specific measurements were standardized using a within‐cohort reference group (Aβ‐negative individuals <70yrs and with global CDR = 0).ResultU.S. POINTER imaging participants are younger than those in ADNI (68.6+/‐5.0yrs vs 70.7+/‐4.4yrs), more likely to be female (65% vs 58%) and from URG (27% vs 15%), and had lower education (14.7+/‐3.3yrs vs 16.7+/‐2.3yrs) and higher Framingham Cardiovascular Risk scores (9.9+/‐8.3 vs 7.7+/‐5.3). The groups differed on several AD biomarkers and cognitive measures (Table). In regression models, AD biomarkers were stronger predictors of cognitive performance in ADNI compared to POINTER. Specifically, Aβ+ individuals with elevated tau had disproportionately poorer cognitive performance in ADNI, and this relationship remained consistent across cognitive measures (Figure). Conversely, demographic/risk variables were stronger predictors in POINTER. Demographic/risk predictors (age, sex, education, race, and FRS) together explained twice as much variance in global cognition in POINTER compared to ADNI (Adjusted R2 = 29% vs 14%). The addition of AD biomarkers to the model further increased the amount of variance in global cognition explained from 14% to 34% in ADNI, but addition of AD biomarkers did not increase variance explained in the POINTER model.ConclusionHeterogeneity among study participants appears to influence baseline biomarker‐cognition relationships such that AD biomarkers explain more variability in cognitive performance in ADNI than POINTER. These findings further suggest that cohort characteristics may affect the potential influence of amyloid‐ and tau‐modifying treatments on cognition.
Cohort heterogeneity and AD biomarkers in older adults without significant cognitive impairment: A comparison of U.S. POINTER and ADNI
Landau, Susan , Baker, Suzanne L. , Lovato, Laura, Masdeu, Joseph C. , Oh, Hwamee , Aggarwal, Neelum T. , Farias, Sarah Tomaszewski , Snyder, Heather M. , Jagust, William J. , Harrison, Theresa M. , Ward, Tyler J. , Koeppe, Robert A. , Vemuri, Prashanthi , Lockhart, Samuel N. , Jung, Youngkyoo , Harvey, Danielle , Toga, Arthur W. , Masdeu, Joseph C , Gitelman, Darren R. , Papp, Kathryn V. , Baker, Laura D. , DeCarli, Charles

Alzheimer's & Dementia | December 25, 2023 | Volume: 19 | Issue: S10 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.081990 Get It

AbstractBackgroundA key focus of the U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is recruitment of unimpaired older individuals at risk for cognitive decline with heterogeneous characteristics (under‐represented racial and ethnicity groups (URG), family history of cognitive decline, hypertension, geographic diversity), and a subset of individuals undergo PET and MRI.MethodTo examine effects of heterogeneity on relationships between risk factors, AD biomarkers (Aß and entorhinal tau PET, hippocampal volume (HV)) and cognition (global, executive function, and memory) were examined from U.S. POINTER neuroimaging participants (N = 602, about 65% of the anticipated total sample) and a subset of Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative participants (N = 503). Neuroimaging data were processed and analyzed using harmonized methods across studies. Some cohort‐specific measurements were standardized using a within‐cohort reference group (Aß‐negative individuals <70yrs and with global CDR = 0).ResultU.S. POINTER imaging participants are younger than those in ADNI (68.6+/‐5.0yrs vs 70.7+/‐4.4yrs), more likely to be female (65% vs 58%) and from URG (27% vs 15%), and had lower education (14.7+/‐3.3yrs vs 16.7+/‐2.3yrs) and higher Framingham Cardiovascular Risk scores (9.9+/‐8.3 vs 7.7+/‐5.3). The groups differed on several AD biomarkers and cognitive measures (Table). In regression models, AD biomarkers were stronger predictors of cognitive performance in ADNI compared to POINTER. Specifically, Aß+ individuals with elevated tau had disproportionately poorer cognitive performance in ADNI, and this relationship remained consistent across cognitive measures (Figure). Conversely, demographic/risk variables were stronger predictors in POINTER. Demographic/risk predictors (age, sex, education, race, and FRS) together explained twice as much variance in global cognition in POINTER compared to ADNI (Adjusted R2 = 29% vs 14%). The addition of AD biomarkers to the model further increased the amount of variance in global cognition explained from 14% to 34% in ADNI, but addition of AD biomarkers did not increase variance explained in the POINTER model.ConclusionHeterogeneity among study participants appears to influence baseline biomarker‐cognition relationships such that AD biomarkers explain more variability in cognitive performance in ADNI than POINTER. These findings further suggest that cohort characteristics may affect the potential influence of amyloid‐ and tau‐modifying treatments on cognition.