Altaras, Caroline

Abstract INTRODUCTION Repetitive head impacts (RHI) from contact sports may cause a unique pattern of white matter hyperintensities (WMH) on T2‐weighted fluid‐attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), termed RHI‐associated WMH (RHI‐WMH). These lesions are punctate, circular, and located at the gray–white matter boundary, an area vulnerable to trauma‐related damage. METHODS We investigated the association of RHI with these lesions in two aging cohorts: (1) former American football players versus asymptomatic unexposed men and (2) individuals with RHI from various contact sports versus non‐RHI participants. RHI‐WMH were assessed using visual ratings and a novel automated quantification pipeline. RESULTS Individuals with RHI had greater RHI‐WMH by both detection methods in both cohorts. RHI‐WMH were associated with plasma neurofilament light and p‐tau231, and flortaucipir positron emission tomography (PET) uptake. DISCUSSION RHI‐WMH may represent a new supportive biomarker for the detection of RHI‐related neuropathologies later in life.

Importance Treatment for cognitive dysfunction due to postacute sequelae of long COVID (ie, symptoms of fatigue, malaise, weakness, confusion that persist beyond 12 weeks after an initial COVID infection) remains a significant unmet need. Objective To test evidence-based rehabilitation strategies for improving cognitive symptoms in persons with long COVID. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a 5-arm, multicenter, randomized clinical trial of 3 remotely delivered interventions conducted between August 17, 2023, and June 10, 2024. The study took place at 22 trial sites and included the screening of individuals with cognitive long COVID. Interventions Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 arms: adaptive computerized cognitive training (BrainHQ [Posit Science]), cognitive-behavioral rehabilitation involving both group and individual counseling sessions (PASC-Cognitive Recovery [PASC-CoRE]) paired with BrainHQ, and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) paired with BrainHQ. Two comparator arms were included as follows: unstructured computer puzzles and games (active comparator) and sham tDCS paired with BrainHQ. The interventions occurred 5 times per week over 10 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures Cognitive and behavioral in-person assessments were performed at baseline, midintervention, at the end of intervention, and 3 months after the end of the intervention. The primary outcome measure was the modified Everyday Cognition Scale 2 (ECog2) completed at the end of the intervention compared to the baseline visit based on participant self-report looking back over the prior 7 days. Results A total of 378 individuals were screened, from which there were 328 participants (median [IQR] age, 48.0 [37.0-58.0] years; 241 female [73.5%]; race: 15 Asian [4.6%], 47 Black [14.3%], and 235 White [71.6%]; ethnicity: 52 Hispanic [15.9%]). None of the 3 active interventions demonstrated benefits on the modified ECog2 in the intention-to-treat population by the end of the intervention period. The adjusted differences in mean change were 0.0 (95% CI, −0.2 to 0.2) for BrainHQ vs active comparator, 0.1 (95% CI, −0.1 to 0.3) for PASC-CoRE + BrainHQ vs active comparator, 0.0 (95% CI, −0.2 to 0.2) for tDCS-active + BrainHQ vs tDCS-sham + BrainHQ, and 0.1 (95% CI, −0.1 to 0.3) for PASC-CoRE + BrainHQ vs BrainHQ alone. Secondary participant-reported outcomes and neuropsychological tests showed no differential benefits for any treatment arm. All 5 arms demonstrated some improvements over time on the modified ECog2 and on secondary outcomes. There were no serious adverse events attributable to the interventions. Conclusions and Relevance This phase 2 randomized clinical trial failed to demonstrate differential benefits for online cognitive training, a structured cognitive rehabilitation program, and tDCS for cognitive long COVID. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05965739 .

AbstractBackgroundClinically meaningful cognitive impairment has typically been defined as a single impaired test score, but this approach is prone to false‐positive errors. Examining two test scores at a lower threshold (i.e., using neuropsychological criteria) can improve diagnostic reliability and has shown stronger associations with biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease. Cognitive impairment in episodic memory and/or executive functioning is a core feature of traumatic encephalopathy syndrome (TES). However, there remains a need to improve the specificity of TES criteria. We applied 1‐ vs. 2‐test criteria for cognitive impairment in former American football players to examine whether 2‐test criteria showed stronger associations with biomarkers of tau, axonal injury, and neurodegeneration.Method169 male former American football players from the DIAGNOSE CTE Research Project completed neuropsychological assessment, lumbar puncture, and MRI (see Table). Episodic memory measures were delayed recall from Craft Story, Brief Visuospatial Memory Test, and NAB List Learning. Executive functioning measures were FAS, Stroop Interference, NAB Mazes, and Trails B. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was measured using Lumipulse technology (p‐tau, t‐tau) and an in‐house ELISA (neurofilament light [NfL]). Hippocampal volumes were extracted from structural MRI using Freesurfer 7.1. Cognitive impairment was identified by 1‐test criteria (≥1.5 SD below norms on one test in either domain) and 2‐test criteria (>1 SD below norms on two tests within a domain). Regressions adjusting for age, race, education, and APOE ε4 status assessed whether meeting 1‐ or 2‐test criteria, separately, predicted log‐transformed CSF p‐tau181, p‐tau231, t‐tau, and NfL, and hippocampal volumes.Result37 of the 99 football players that were impaired by 1‐test criteria did not meet 2‐test criteria, and four uniquely met 2‐test but not 1‐test criteria (see Figure). Cognitive impairment by 2‐test but not 1‐test criteria predicted higher log‐CSF NfL (2‐test: B = 0.24, p = .007; 1‐test: B = 0.06, p = .53), smaller left hippocampal volume (2‐test: B = ‐195.84, p = .01; 1‐test: B = ‐131.52, p = .08), and smaller right hippocampal volume (2‐test: B = ‐161.19, p = .045; 1‐test: B = ‐134.88, p = .08). Neither criterion predicted p‐tau181, p‐tau231, or t‐tau.Conclusion2‐test criteria demonstrated stronger associations between cognitive impairment and markers of axonal injury and neurodegeneration. Incorporating multiple test scores to identify cognitive impairment could improve diagnostic specificity in TES.

AbstractBackgroundTraumatic encephalopathy syndrome (TES) is the proposed clinical syndrome of chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a neurodegenerative disease associated with repetitive head impacts in contact/collision sports. A core clinical feature of TES is cognitive impairment, particularly in memory and executive functions. Cognitive intraindividual variability (IIV) is the extent of variability in neuropsychological test performance (i.e., dispersion of test scores) and is believed to be an indicator of disruption in executive control, linked to altered fronto‐subcortical circuits. Here, we examined cognitive IIV as a method to detect subtle executive dysfunction in TES that may not be captured by traditional neuropsychological measures.MethodThe sample included former American football players (120 professional, 60 college); participants were males, aged 45‐74. Participants completed a baseline neuropsychological test battery (n = 8 excluded for suboptimal performance validity). A multidisciplinary diagnostic consensus conference classified participants using the 2021 NINDS Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for TES (see Table‐1): (1) No‐TES (n = 62); (2) TES‐CTE Suggestive (n = 35); (3) TES‐CTE Possible (n = 21); (4) TES‐CTE Probable (n = 54). TES‐CTE Possible and Probable were combined. The coefficient of variation (CoV) was used to measure cognitive IIV (CoV = iSD/iOTBM, iOTBM = average T‐score across neuropsychological tests; iSD = standard deviation of iOTBM). A higher CoV indicates greater score dispersion. To avoid circularity, memory and executive tests used for classifying TES groups were intentionally excluded from the CoV calculation. Analysis of covariance compared the TES groups on CoV, controlling for age, education, and race.ResultResults showed a significant difference in CoV between TES groups, F(2, 165) = 8.20 p<.001, partial η2 = .09. The TES‐CTE Possible/Probable group had the highest CoV (M = .226, SE = .007), compared with the TES‐no (M = .192, SE = .008, p<.001) and TES‐CTE Suggestive groups (M = .178, SE = .011, p<.001). CoV did not significantly differ between the TES‐no and TES‐CTE suggestive groups (Mdiff = 0.014, SE = .013, p = .293).ConclusionThe TES‐CTE possible/probable group had the highest cognitive IIV with ∼23% dispersion (vs. ∼18‐19% in TES‐no and TES‐CTE suggestive groups), suggesting greater cognitive variability in those with the greatest likelihood for having underlying CTE (based on TES criteria). This finding emphasizes the potential utility of exploring cognitive IIV as a method for detecting nuanced executive dysfunction in TES.