Carrillo, María C.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's Disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. As part of the modified Delphi approach and guideline development process (7374 publications were reviewed; 133 met inclusion criteria) an expert workgroup developed recommendations as steps in a patient‐centered evaluation process. The workgroup provided a summary of validated instruments to measure symptoms in daily life (including cognition, mood and behavior, and daily function) and to test for signs of cognitive impairment in the office. This article distills this information to provide a resource to support clinicians in the implementation of this approach in clinical practice. The companion articles provide context for primary care and specialty clinicians with regard to how to fit these instruments into the workflow and actions to take when integration of performance on these instruments with clinical profile and clinician judgment support potential cognitive impairment.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) manifests prior to the age of 65, and affects 4%–8% of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). The current analyses sought to examine longitudinal cognitive trajectories of participants with early‐onset dementia. METHODS Data from 307 cognitively normal (CN) volunteer participants and those with amyloid‐positive EOAD or amyloid‐negative cognitive impairment (EOnonAD) were compared. Cognitive trajectories across a comprehensive cognitive battery spanning 42 months were examined using mixed‐effects modeling. RESULTS The EOAD group displayed worse cognition at baseline relative to EOnonAD and CN groups, and more aggressive declines in cognition over time. The largest effects were observed on measures of executive functioning domains, while memory declines were blunted in EOAD. DISCUSSION EOAD declined 2–4× faster than EOnonAD, and EOAD pathology is not restricted to memory networks. Early identification of deficits is critical to ensure that individuals with sporadic EOAD can be considered for treatment using disease‐modifying medications. Highlights Represents the most comprehensive longitudinal characterization of sporadic EOAD to date. The trajectory of cognitive declines was steep for EOAD participants and worse than for other groups. Executive functioning measures exhibited the greatest declines over time in EOAD.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) and late‐onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) share similar amyloid etiology, but evidence from smaller‐scale studies suggests that they manifest differently clinically. Current analyses sought to contrast the cognitive profiles of EOAD and LOAD. METHODS Z‐ score cognitive‐domain composites for 311 amyloid‐positive sporadic EOAD and 314 amyloid‐positive LOAD participants were calculated from baseline data from age‐appropriate control cohorts. Z‐ score composites were compared between AD groups for each domain. RESULTS After controlling for cognitive status, EOAD displayed worse visuospatial, executive functioning, and processing speed/attention skills relative to LOAD, and LOAD displayed worse language, episodic immediate memory, and episodic delayed memory. DISCUSSION Sporadic EOAD possesses distinct cognitive profiles relative to LOAD. Clinicians should be alert for non‐amnestic impairments in younger patients to ensure proper identification and intervention using disease‐modifying treatments. Highlights Both early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) and late‐onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) participants displayed widespread cognitive impairments relative to their same‐aged peers. Cognitive impairments were more severe for EOAD than for LOAD participants in visuospatial and executive domains. Memory and language impairments were more severe for LOAD than for EOAD participants Results were comparable after removing clinical phenotypes of posterior cortical atrophy (PCA), primary progressive aphasia (lv‐PPA), and frontal‐variant AD.

Abstract The immune system is a key player in the onset and progression of neurodegenerative disorders. While brain resident immune cell‐mediated neuroinflammation and peripheral immune cell (eg, T cell) infiltration into the brain have been shown to significantly contribute to Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology, the nature and extent of immune responses in the brain in the context of AD and related dementias (ADRD) remain unclear. Furthermore, the roles of the peripheral immune system in driving ADRD pathology remain incompletely elucidated. In March of 2023, the Alzheimer's Association convened the Alzheimer's Association International Conference (AAIC), Advancements: Immunity, to discuss the roles of the immune system in ADRD. A wide range of topics were discussed, such as animal models that replicate human pathology, immune‐related biomarkers and clinical trials, and lessons from other fields describing immune responses in neurodegeneration. This manuscript presents highlights from the conference and outlines avenues for future research on the roles of immunity in neurodegenerative disorders. Highlights The immune system plays a central role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. The immune system exerts numerous effects throughout the brain on amyloid‐beta, tau, and other pathways. The 2023 AAIC, Advancements: Immunity, encouraged discussions and collaborations on understanding the role of the immune system.

Abstract The newly proposed revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer's disease (AD) by the Alzheimer's Association (AA) Workgroup represent a significant milestone in the field. These criteria offer objective measures for diagnosing and staging biological AD, bridging the gap between research and clinical care. Although implementation feasibility may vary across regions and settings, improving the availability and accuracy of biomarkers, especially plasma biomarkers, is expected to enhance the applicability of these criteria in clinical practice. The Fall 2023 Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) meeting served as a forum for gathering industry perspectives and feedback on these revised criteria, ensuring that the new criteria inform research, clinical trial design, and clinical care. In this article, we outline a summary of the newly proposed “Revised Criteria for Diagnosis and Staging of AD: AA Workgroup” and provide highlights from the AARR meeting in fall 2023. Highlights The Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) convened leaders from industry, academia, and government, to review the Revised Criteria for Diagnosis and Staging of AD: AA Workgroup , and gather industry perspectives and feedback on these revised criteria before its publication. The newly proposed revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer's disease (AD) by the AA's Workgroup represent a significant milestone, offering objective measures for the biological and staging of AD and bridging the gap between research and clinical care. Improving the availability and accuracy of biomarkers, especially blood‐based biomarkers (BBMs) is expected to improve clinical research and enhance the applicability of these criteria in clinical practice.

Abstract INTRODUCTION The U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is evaluating lifestyle interventions in older adults at risk for cognitive decline and dementia. Here we characterize the baseline data set of the POINTER Imaging ancillary study. METHODS Participants underwent health and cognitive assessments and neuroimaging with multimodal positron emission tomography (PET) (beta‐amyloid [Aβ] and tau) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Framingham risk score (FRS) was used to quantify cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. RESULTS A total of 1052 participants (31% from underrepresented ethnoracial groups) were enrolled. Compared to Aβ−, Aβ+ (29%) participants were older, had higher apolipoprotein E ( APOE ) ε4 carriage rate and white matter hyperintensity volume, and greater temporal tau. FRS was related to MRI measures, but not AD biomarkers. FRS and tau had independent effects on cognition. DISCUSSION In this heterogenous, at‐risk cohort, CVD risk was related to more abnormal brain structure and poorer cognition, representing a putative non‐AD (Alzheimer's disease) pathway to brain injury and cognitive decline. Highlights The U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) cohort is enriched for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and poor lifestyle POINTER Imaging collected multimodal neuroimaging data in this unique, at‐risk cohort Amyloid burden was related to age, apolipoprotein E ( APOE ) ε4 carriage, and measures of disease progression Associations between amyloid and tau, and tau and cognition, were relatively weak CVD risk and tau pathology were independently related to memory

AbstractThe emergence of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)‐approved amyloid‐targeting therapies for Alzheimer's disease challenges clinicians and healthcare providers with a transformative landscape. Effectively communicating the risks, benefits, burdens, costs, and available support associated with these novel disease‐modifying treatments to patients, families, and other healthcare providers is essential but complex. In response, the Alzheimer's Association's Clinical Meaningfulness Workgroup has proposed language surrounding treatment eligibility, benefits, amyloid‐related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotyping, and treatment costs, serving as a resource to healthcare professionals in navigating discussions with patients and their families. As the landscape evolves with the approval of new Alzheimer's therapies, this resource stands poised for updates, ensuring its continued relevance in facilitating informed and meaningful patient‐provider dialogues.Highlights Effective communication of risks, benefits, burdens, and costs of FDA‐approved amyloid‐targeting antibodies is essential to patients, families, and healthcare providers. The Alzheimer's Association's Clinical Meaningfulness Workgroup provides language for physicians and healthcare providers around treatment eligibility, benefits, ARIA, APOE genotyping, and treatment costs. This supplementary resource may be updated as new AD therapies become approved.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Tau‐positron emission tomography (PET) outcome data of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) cannot currently be meaningfully compared or combined when different tracers are used due to differences in tracer properties, instrumentation, and methods of analysis. METHODS Using head‐to‐head data from five cohorts with tau PET radiotracers designed to target tau deposition in AD, we tested a joint propagation model (JPM) to harmonize quantification (units termed “CenTauR” [CTR]). JPM is a statistical model that simultaneously models the relationships between head‐to‐head and anchor point data. JPM was compared to a linear regression approach analogous to the one used in the amyloid PET Centiloid scale. RESULTS A strong linear relationship was observed between CTR values across brain regions. Using the JPM approach, CTR estimates were similar to, but more accurate than, those derived using the linear regression approach. DISCUSSION Preliminary findings using the JPM support the development and adoption of a universal scale for tau‐PET quantification. Highlights Tested a novel joint propagation model (JPM) to harmonize quantification of tau PET. Units of common scale are termed “CenTauRs”. Tested a Centiloid‐like linear regression approach. Using five cohorts with head‐to‐head tau PET, JPM outperformed linearregressionbased approach. Strong linear relationship was observed between CenTauRs values across brain regions.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONThe apolipoprotein E gene (APOE) is an established central player in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), with distinct apoE isoforms exerting diverse effects. apoE influences not only amyloid‐beta and tau pathologies but also lipid and energy metabolism, neuroinflammation, cerebral vascular health, and sex‐dependent disease manifestations. Furthermore, ancestral background may significantly impact the link between APOE and AD, underscoring the need for more inclusive research.METHODSIn 2023, the Alzheimer's Association convened multidisciplinary researchers at the “AAIC Advancements: APOE” conference to discuss various topics, including apoE isoforms and their roles in AD pathogenesis, progress in apoE‐targeted therapeutic strategies, updates on disease models and interventions that modulate apoE expression and function.RESULTSThis manuscript presents highlights from the conference and provides an overview of opportunities for further research in the field.DISCUSSIONUnderstanding apoE's multifaceted roles in AD pathogenesis will help develop targeted interventions for AD and advance the field of AD precision medicine.Highlights APOE is a central player in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. APOE exerts a numerous effects throughout the brain on amyloid‐beta, tau, and other pathways. The AAIC Advancements: APOE conference encouraged discussions and collaborations on understanding the role of APOE.

Abstract The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association convened three separate work groups in 2011 and single work groups in 2012 and 2018 to create recommendations for the diagnosis and characterization of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The present document updates the 2018 research framework in response to several recent developments. Defining diseases biologically, rather than based on syndromic presentation, has long been standard in many areas of medicine (e.g., oncology), and is becoming a unifying concept common to all neurodegenerative diseases, not just AD. The present document is consistent with this principle. Our intent is to present objective criteria for diagnosis and staging AD, incorporating recent advances in biomarkers, to serve as a bridge between research and clinical care. These criteria are not intended to provide step‐by‐step clinical practice guidelines for clinical workflow or specific treatment protocols, but rather serve as general principles to inform diagnosis and staging of AD that reflect current science. Highlights We define Alzheimer's disease (AD) to be a biological process that begins with the appearance of AD neuropathologic change (ADNPC) while people are asymptomatic. Progression of the neuropathologic burden leads to the later appearance and progression of clinical symptoms. Early‐changing Core 1 biomarkers (amyloid positron emission tomography [PET], approved cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, and accurate plasma biomarkers [especially phosphorylated tau 217]) map onto either the amyloid beta or AD tauopathy pathway; however, these reflect the presence of ADNPC more generally (i.e., both neuritic plaques and tangles). An abnormal Core 1 biomarker result is sufficient to establish a diagnosis of AD and to inform clinical decision making throughout the disease continuum. Later‐changing Core 2 biomarkers (biofluid and tau PET) can provide prognostic information, and when abnormal, will increase confidence that AD is contributing to symptoms. An integrated biological and clinical staging scheme is described that accommodates the fact that common copathologies, cognitive reserve, and resistance may modify relationships between clinical and biological AD stages.