Carrillo, Marı́a 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 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 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.

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.

AbstractBackgroundThe U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is a two‐year randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the effects of lifestyle interventions on older adults aged 60‐79 years. The POINTER Imaging ancillary study employs arterial spin labeling (ASL) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with two inversion times, enabling the mapping of arterial transit time (ATT) and the investigation of its relationship with dementia risk factors. This study examines the effect of the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) on ATT, which provides hemodynamic information on the cerebral vasculature.MethodA subset of POINTER Imaging participants (n = 134; F/M = 81/53; age = 68.1±5.1; FRS = 11.3±10.4) from two imaging sites underwent two ASL MRI scans during the baseline session. Two 3D Pulsed ASL scans were obtained with TI1 of 790ms and TI2 values of 2000ms or 2750ms, providing delay times (between labeling and imaging) of 1210ms or 1960ms. ATT, the time required for blood to travel from the neck to the tissue, was estimated in the range of 1210ms and 1960ms using a kinetic model (Figure 1). ATT maps were normalized to a standard space, and a voxel‐wise linear regression (ATT∼age+sex+log(FRS)) was performed on ATT maps in gray matter to assess the effect of FRS on ATT. To control false positives, clusters smaller than 1.4ml were removed based on a simulation with α = 0.05.ResultFigure 2 depicts three clusters found in the occipital, precuneus and frontal gray matter regions, all of which demonstrate a positive relationship between ATT and log(FRS). Participants with higher FRS exhibit prolonged mean ATT values in the clusters as shown in Figure 3. After stratifying into sex groups, both groups show the same direction.ConclusionAlthough the detectable range of ATT with two ASL scans was limited, the analysis suggests that an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, as quantified by the Framingham Risk Score, can serve as an indicator of potential cerebrovascular disease leading to prolonged ATT, which is associated with arterial stiffness, and vascular resistance. The clusters demonstrating the association between FRS and ATT are the brain regions that may have heightened vulnerability to vascular risk factors, according to previous studies.

AbstractBackgroundPreviously, we found that female sex is associated with greater pathology burden in early‐onset Alzheimer’s disease (EOAD) in the Longitudinal EOAD Study (LEADS). Here, we have expanded our analyses by adding APOE‐ε4 carrier status as a further predictor of EOAD pathologic burden.MethodWe included 180 EOAD LEADS participants with available APOE genotype, Flortaucipir PET, Florbetaben PET, and MRI data. Demographic and biomarker differences were analyzed using ANOVA. EOAD participants were split by sex and APOE‐ε4 carrier status. Box plots were created in R and a voxel‐wise multiple linear regression in SPM12 yielded statistical brain maps of gray matter density (GMD), amyloid and tau burden.ResultCompared to males, EOAD females showed significantly greater global amyloid uptake (mean SUVR, p=0.002) and greater tau SUVR in the MetaROI, Braak 3&4 and 5&6 regions (p=0.0007, p=0.001, p=0.01, resp., Table 1). Female APOE‐ε4 carriers showed greater tau SUVR in Braak regions 1&2 than female non‐carriers (p<0.01, Figure 2B). Male APOE‐ε4 carriers showed trend‐level thinner entorhinal cortex than male non‐carriers (p=0.06, Figure 1). Interestingly however, femaleAPOE‐ε4 non‐carriers showed greater global amyloid SUVR than female carriers (p<0.01, Figure 2A). Further, APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers showed significantly thinner medial temporal cortices than carriers in both sexes (M, p<0.05; F, p<0.01). Male APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers also showed significantly lower mean cortical thickness than male carriers (p<0.05, Figure 1). Female APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers showed trend‐level lower mean cortical thickness than female carriers (p=0.06, Figure 1). The FWE corrected SPM12 maps showed significantly greater GM atrophy in the right temporal lobe and greater amyloid burden in a right lateralized occipitoparietal pattern in female APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers compared to female carriers. Further, male APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers showed greater tau uptake in the left frontal lobe than male carriers (Figure 3).ConclusionThese results suggest that APOE‐ε4 non‐carrier status is associated with greater atrophy, amyloid and tau deposition in EOAD. This might be due to the presence of other strong genetic drivers of disease pathology in EOAD.

AbstractBackgroundDyadic (self and study partner) subjective reports of an individual’s recent cognitive and functional decline are an efficient approach to facilitate identification of older adults with, and at risk for, Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). Such methods can be easily adapted for remote administration, but few studies have investigated the ability of remotely‐collected, unsupervised dyadic subjective reports to accurately detect MCI and cognitive decline.MethodsIn 289 older adults enrolled in the Brain health Registry (BHR), with clinically‐confirmed diagnoses of Cognitively‐unimpaired (CU) or MCI, we identified the optimal combination of remote measures to accurately distinguish CU from MCI. We then externally validated our predictive model in 217 participants enrolled in a separate cohort, Validation of Online Methods to Predict Cognitive Decline (eVAL). Predictors included Cogstate Brief Battery One Card Learning (OCL) accuracy; self‐ and study partner‐reported memory concern (SMCs); performance on online adaptations of Everyday Cognition Scale (ECog, self‐ and study partner‐report versions), Geriatric Depression Scale Short Form (GDS); family history of AD, age, gender, and education. We calculated 10‐fold cross validated area under the ROC curves (cvAUC), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and the percentage of participants correctly classified (accuracy) for all models. Likelihood ratio (LR) tests were used to compare model fits.ResultsIn the BHR cohort, models including dyad‐report ECog, family history of AD, GDS, and Cogstate OCL scores distinguished CU from MCI with the highest accuracy (cvAUC = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.83, 0.92; accuracy = 85.5%). Models excluding study partner‐report ECog distinguished diagnostic groups with moderate accuracy (cvAUC = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.78, 0.85; accuracy = 75.9%) When applied to the validation cohort, the optimal training model including dyadic report performed with moderate accuracy ( Table 2 ). In the validation cohort, inclusion of study partner (but not self) report SMC, in addition to dyadic‐report ECog, improved model fit (LR test p<0.01).ConclusionsRemotely‐collected dyadic subjective measures, along with other remote measures, accurately distinguish CU from MCI. Subjective cognitive and functional decline and concerns about memory problems independently contribute to diagnostic discrimination. Results support future utilization of remote dyadic subjective measures to efficiently identify older adults with MCI for prodromal AD clinical trials, and in clinical care settings.

AbstractBackgroundThe U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is a 2‐year randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of lifestyle interventions in older adults (60‐79 years). The POINTER Imaging ancillary study is collecting Arterial Spin Labeling (ASL) MRI data to map cerebral blood flow (CBF) and evaluate the effect of interventions in the perfusion imaging biomarker. The optimization of timing parameters is essential for robust and efficient acquisition of ASL MRI.MethodA subset (n=83; F/M=51/32; age=69.0±5.5) of POINTER Imaging participants at two imaging sites underwent two ASL MRI scans during the same baseline session. Two 3D Pulsed ASL were obtained with TI1 of 790ms and TI2 values of 2000ms or 2750ms, which provide the delay times (between labeling and imaging) of 1210ms or 1960ms. ASL images were quantified into a physiological unit of CBF, ml/100g/min, using a single compartment kinetic model. CBF maps from two scans were normalized into a standard space and a voxel‐wise paired t‐test was performed after site variations were harmonized and covariates (age and sex) were adjusted. The age and sex effects in the difference of CBF values between two scans were also examined using linear regression. To control false positives, clusters smaller than 41ml were removed based on a simulation with α=0.05.ResultThe CBF values in ASL MRI rely on the timing of image acquisition: only a fraction of label bolus arrives in the tissue with a short delay while images suffer from low signal due to the magnetization decay with a long delay. Figure 1 shows the regions that require a long delay time (red) or a short delay (blue). The difference in CBF is proportional to arterial transit time (ATT) and the analysis shows females have shorter ATT mainly in the peri‐Sylvian region (Figure 2). No cluster survived correction in the analysis of the aging effect.ConclusionThe acquisition of two CBF maps not only offers optimization of acquisition timing but provides an additional perfusion parameter, arterial transit time, which may be a potential biomarker of cerebrovascular pathophysiology.

The fourth Leon Thal Symposium (LTS2010) was convened in Toulouse, France, on November 3, 2010. This symposium reviewed design parameters that are necessary to develop comprehensive national databases on healthy aging. Such datasets offer the potential to serve as the foundation for a systems‐approach to solve the dual public health problems of: (1) early detection of people who are at elevated risk for Alzheimer's disease, and (2) the development of interventions to delay onset of, or prevent, late‐life dementia. The symposium considered three interrelated components of a National Database for Longitudinal Studies on Healthy Aging as follows: (a) a registry of healthy aging adults; (b) refined computer‐based assessments for data gathering, including assessments of behavioral/memory changes associated with aging that are appropriate for broad use in nonexpert settings; and (c) high performance computing/supercomputer‐based approaches for health data modeling and mining.