Lew, Caroline

A bstract Alzheimer’s disease (AD) presents with substantial clinical and anatomical heterogeneity, including both typical amnestic and atypical variants such as posterior cortical atrophy and logopenic primary progressive aphasia. Although neurofibrillary tangle (NFT) burden is a defining pathological feature of AD, its regional distribution varies across clinical phenotypes, suggesting that selective neuronal vulnerability may shape disease presentation. However, the cellular and molecular determinants underlying this vulnerability remain incompletely understood. Here, we profiled single-nucleus transcriptomes across multiple brain regions, including hippocampal (CA1) and neocortical (superior temporal gyrus and occipital cortex) regions, from individuals with typical and atypical AD and healthy controls. Integrative analysis identified major cell classes and resolved diverse excitatory and inhibitory neuronal subpopulations that were reproducibly observed across regions and individuals. Using quasi-binomial regression models to assess compositional changes, we quantified subtype-specific vulnerability associated with AD pathology. We identified a distinct excitatory neuronal subpopulation characterized by NRGN and BEX1 expression, which showed reproducible depletion across multiple regions, with the strongest evidence in amnestic AD and in neocortical regions in lvPPA. This vulnerable population showed concordance with previously reported AD-associated excitatory neuron signatures, supporting a conserved transcriptional program of susceptibility. Genes enriched in this population were associated with chemical synaptic transmission and regulation of synaptic plasticity and formed interconnected networks in protein-protein interaction analyses. These findings suggest that intrinsic properties related to synaptic function may predispose specific neuronal populations to degeneration in AD. Together, our results define a conserved, transcriptionally distinct excitatory neuron subpopulation that is selectively vulnerable across AD phenotypes and brain regions. This work provides a framework for linking regional pathology to cell-type-specific susceptibility and highlights synaptic regulatory pathways as potential contributors to neuronal degeneration in Alzheimer’s disease.

Abstract Background Individuals meeting neuropathological criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) can exhibit distinct clinical syndromes, suggesting region‐specific neuronal susceptibilities to tau pathology. Amnestic AD cases show greater tau burden in CA1, logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA) in the superior temporal gyrus (STG), and posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) in the occipital cortex. We hypothesize that by contrasting these AD variants and examining their respective pathological hotspots, we can identify the most vulnerable neuronal subpopulations ‐ those that exhibit the greatest reduction in their specific hotspot area compared to other regions. Using single‐nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA‐seq), we investigate the molecular mechanisms driving this selective neuronal vulnerability. Methods We performed snRNA‐seq using the Chromium Single Cell 3′ (10X Genomics, USA) platform on nuclei extracted from the CA1 hippocampal sector, posterior STG, and occipital cortex of postmortem brain tissue from 68 individuals. The cohort included 24 amnestic AD cases, 11 lvPPA cases, and 6 PCA cases (all meeting A3B3C3 pathological criteria), along with 27 healthy controls (A≤1B≤1C≤1). Bioinformatics analysis was conducted using the Seurat library in R. Cell subpopulation comparisons were performed using the Wald statistical test, with p ‐values < .05 considered significant. Results Following quality control, we recovered over 1.58 million nuclei, with an average of 2,129 genes detected per nucleus. UMAP clustering identified 17 inhibitory and 16 excitatory neuronal subpopulations across all three regions. Among these, one excitatory subpopulation was highly enriched in CA1. We identified six excitatory subpopulations (Exc‐subs) exhibiting region‐specific vulnerability. Notably, the Ex L2/3 IT RORB GRIN1 subpopulation showed pronounced vulnerability in CA1 among amnestic cases, in STG among amnestic and lvPPA cases, and displayed a vulnerability trend in the occipital cortex among PCA cases, though not statistically significant. Conclusion Our findings suggest that a specific excitatory neuron subpopulation exhibits heightened susceptibility across highly tau‐affected regions in amnestic and atypical AD syndromes, including PCA. Ongoing validation using quantitative pathology aims to confirm these findings, and further case analyses will refine our understanding of the molecular drivers of neuronal vulnerability in AD.

AbstractBackgroundIndividuals meeting neuropathological criteria for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) may manifest with atypical clinical syndromes. Past work showed that the neurobiological basis for these differences is related to specific neuronal vulnerabilities for tau pathology. For instance, amnestic cases have a higher burden of neurofibrillary changes in CA1. In contrast, logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA) cases have a higher tau burden in the superior temporal gyrus (STG). Single‐cell technology enables investigations on the molecular basis of differential neuronal vulnerability in AD. Consequently, we delved into the factors that underlie this selective vulnerability by analyzing brain samples from individuals exclusively afflicted with AD but exhibiting diverse clinical manifestations.MethodsnRNA Sequencing using the Chromium Single Cell 3′ (10X Genomics, USA) on nuclei cells extracted from the CA1 sector and posterior STG of postmortem brain tissue of 48 individuals either meeting pathological criteria for AD (A3B3C3; 24 amnestic and eleven lvPPA) and healthy controls (A≤1B≤1C≤1; n = 13) (Table 1, Fig. 1A/B). Bioinformatics analyses were conducted using Cell Ranger and R software. Comparisons between cell subpopulations were conducted with the Wald statistical test, and p‐values < .05 were considered significant.ResultAfter quality control, we recovered more than 250k nuclei with a mean of 2,130 genes per nuclei. Upon cross‐sample alignment and t‐stochastic neighborhood embedding clustering (Fig. 1C), we found 21 excitatory neuronal subpopulations (Exc‐sub) in CA1 and 26 in STG, and 22 and 25 inhibitory neuronal subpopulations (Inh‐sub) in CA1 and STG, respectively; 16 astrocytes subpopulations in both areas and 20 microglia subpopulations in CA1 and 17 in STG (Fig. 2). One STG Exc‐sub, expressing CUX2 and LAMP5 genes showed vulnerability in lvPPA patients. Also, one STG Inh‐sub, expressing the ADARB2 gene, showed vulnerability for all AD patients.ConclusionOur preliminary study identified a vulnerable population of excitatory neurons related to lvPPA. We are conducting validation studies using quantitative pathology to confirm these results. Furthermore, analysis of a higher number of cases is ongoing and will continue to inform on factors associated with neuronal vulnerability.

AbstractBackgroundIndividuals with neuropathological criteria for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) may manifest with atypical clinical syndromes. Past work showed that the neurobiological basis for these differences is related to specific neuronal vulnerabilities for tau pathology. For instance, amnestic cases have a higher burden of neurofibrillary changes in CA1. In contrast, logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA) cases have a higher tau burden in the superior temporal gyrus (STG). Single‐cell technology enables investigations on the molecular basis of differential neuronal vulnerability in AD. Therefore, we investigated factors underlying selective vulnerability using brain samples from individuals with pure AD with different clinical manifestations.MethodsnRNA Sequencing using the Chromium Single Cell 3′ (10X Genomics, USA) on nuclei cells extracted from the CA1 sector and posterior STG of postmortem brain tissue of 24 individuals either meeting pathological criteria for AD (A3B3C3; 12 amnestic and eight lvPPA) and healthy controls (A≤1B≤1C≤1; n = 4) (Table 1, Fig. 1A/B). Bioinformatics analyses were conducted using Cell Ranger and R software. Comparisons between cell subpopulations were conducted with Wald statistical test, and p‐values < .05 were considered significant.ResultAfter quality control, we recovered 98,180 nuclei with a mean of 2,130 genes per nuclei. Upon cross‐sample alignment and t‐stochastic neighborhood embedding clustering (Fig. 1C), we found 21 excitatory neuronal subpopulations (Exc‐sub) in CA1 and 26 in STG, and 22 and 27 inhibitory neuronal subpopulations (Inh‐sub) in CA1 and STG, respectively; 16 astrocytes subpopulations in both areas and 20 microglia subpopulations in CA1 and 17 in STG (Fig. 2). One STG Exc‐sub, expressing CUX2 and LAMP5 genes showed vulnerability in lvPPA patients. Also, one STG Inh‐sub, expressing the ADARB2 gene, showed vulnerability for all AD patients. Furthermore, two astrocytes subpopulations (one in both areas and one in STG) and three STG microglia subpopulations showed proportional composition changes comparing AD patients and HC.ConclusionOur preliminary study identified a vulnerable population of excitatory neurons related to lvPPA. We are conducting validation studies using quantitative pathology to confirm these results. Furthermore, analysis of a higher number of cases is ongoing and will continue to inform on factors associated with neuronal vulnerability.