Oliveira, Markley

AbstractBackgroundTau PET provides continuous measurements of tau tangle pathology in the human brain. However, establishing cutoffs is crucial for selecting individuals for treatment in clinical trials or practice. In the absence of postmortem data, PET cutoffs must be established using statistical methods based on what is considered normal tracer uptake. In this study, we tested the impact of various methods to determine tau positivity using two different tau PET tracers in individuals scanned head‐to‐head.MethodsWe studied 147 individuals from Head‐to‐Head Harmonization of Tau Tracers in Alzheimer's Disease (HEAD) study with tau tangle PET scans with [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK‐6240, and amyloid‐β (Aβ) PET. Tau deposition was measured with the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) of each agent in the Medial Temporal Lobe (MTL) and the Entorhinal Cortex (EC). To determine Tau positivity three different methods were used: >2.5 standard deviations (SD) than the mean of the young, >1.5 SD mean of the cognitively unimpaired (CU) and >1.5 SD mean of CUAβ‐.ResultsDemographic characteristics of the study population are reported in Table 1. Using the cutoff >2.5 SD mean of young, [18F]Flortaucipir was positive in 35 (23.8%) and 69 (46.9%) individuals in the EC and MTL, respectively. [18F]MK‐6240 was positive in 49 (33.3%) and 58 (39.5%) individuals in EC and in MTL. Using >1.5 SD mean of CUAβ‐, [18F]Flortaucipir was positive in 38 (25.9%) and 45 (30.6%) individuals in EC and MTL, while [18F]MK‐6240 was positive in 51 (34.7%) and 50 (34.0%) in EC and in MTL (Figure 1).ConclusionsOur findings indicate variations in tau positivity when employing different methods based on either the young or CUAβ‐. [18F]Flortaucipir exhibited a higher rate of positive results when the method based on young individuals was applied in the MTL. Conversely, [18F]MK‐6240 showed more consistent and generally higher positivity when other methods were used for cutoff determination and/or in the EC region. Further research with a larger sample size is required to gain a better understanding of the optimal cutoff determination methods for these tracers.

AbstractBackgroundUtilizing PET amyloid‐beta (Aβ) and tau for staging Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) has demonstrated potential in identifying individuals with varying degrees of disease severity, applicable to both clinical trials and practice. However, the diverse binding characteristics of tau tracers pose challenges to the application of this staging across different ligands. In this study, we evaluate a novel staging framework proposed by the AA working group, employing Aβ PET and either [18F]MK6240 or [18F]Flortaucipir in individuals participating in a head‐to‐head study of tau PET tracers. This will provide insights into the robustness of this framework when applied across different tau ligands.MethodWe evaluated 154 people (89 CU and 65 CI), with MK6240, Flortaucipir, Aβ‐PET, MRI. SUVRs used inferior cerebellar gray as reference. Participants were categorized in Aβ positivity(A), using visual read, and tau positivity (T) in medial temporal lobe(MTL) and neocortex(NEO). Tau MTL(TMTL) and NEO positivity were defined as average +3 SD of youngs. NEO moderate(TMOD) and high(THIGH) was defined as below and above median SUVR of NEO‐positive individuals. Individuals were grouped as: A‐T‐, A+T‐, A+TMTL+(early), A+TMOD+(intermediary), and A+THIGH+(advanced).ResultsWe found that the distribution of the number of individuals across the five AD stages was comparable when using both MK6240 and Flortaucipir tracers (Figure 1). However, upon examining the concordance within each group, we found a low concordance of 30% (3/10) between tracers in the early tau stage (A+TMTL+). Concordance increased in the intermediary stage A+TMOD+, with a rate of 65% (9/14), and further increased to 79% (11/14) in the advanced stage (A+THIGH+). The A+T‐ group exhibited the highest concordance between tracer results, at 95% (21/22).ConclusionOur findings indicate that the application of this framework across different populations using different tau tracers can lead to a compatible distribution among groups. However, in a direct comparison, we noted that this did not necessarily result in high concordance between groups, as group shifts were observed that depended on the cutoffs used (data not shown). These results emphasize the necessity for harmonization of tau PET tracers prior to their utilization for stage determination.

AbstractBackgroundIdentification of cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals who may progress to mild cognitive impairment (MCI), is a pressing issue in the Alzheimer’s disease (AD) field, since therapeutic interventions may be more effective in the absence of cognitive impairment and neurodegeneration. CU individuals positive for amyloid and tau PET are very likely in the AD pathway. In out‐patient cognitive screening, we use rapid and simple tests such as The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) ‐ a composite of executive, visuospatial, naming, attention, language, abstraction, delayed recall, and orientation performances. We hypothesize that sub‐categorizing the CU group based on the presence of amyloid (A) and tau (T) pathologies, as measured by PET, can reveal subtle cognitive deficits, even in a clinical test with low sensitivity such as MoCA.MethodWe included 88 CU [defined as CDR global score of 0] older adults with available head‐to‐head MK6240 tau‐PET and Flortaucipir tracers from the ongoing HEAD multi‐site observational study. They also underwent Amyloid PET imaging using PiB or NAV4694. MoCA testing was done around the imaging time. To increase similarity with clinical practice, Amyloid and Tau PET positivity was defined using visual reads. Based on tracer uptake status, we categorized the individuals into A‐T‐, A‐T+, A+T‐ and A‐T‐ groups. Unpaired t‐test and one‐way ANOVA were used to test for significant differences between groups.Result2‐tailed p‐values were significant between the A‐T‐ group and the A+T+ group for MoCA total score [p: 0.0025 and p: 0.0025]. When we stratified MoCA in the different cognitive domains, we found that the results were driven by MoCA (memory) Delayed Recall score [p: 0.0007 and p: 0.0162]. A‐T+ vs A+T+ was also significant [p: 0.0099] for MoCA Delayed Recall. Both tau tracers (MK6240 and Flortaucipir) showed similar performance for determining T+ and identifying cognitive decline.ConclusionMoCA, a simple and commonly administered in‐office neuropsychological test, can detect subtle cognitive dysfunction in CU older adults who are Aβ and tau positive (A+/T+). These CU A+/T+ individuals are likely on the path to developing AD dementia.

AbstractBackgroundTau PET provides continuous measurements of tau tangle pathology in the human brain. However, establishing cutoffs is crucial for selecting individuals for treatment in clinical trials or practice. In the absence of postmortem data, PET cutoffs must be established using statistical methods based on what is considered normal tracer uptake. In this study, we tested the impact of various methods to determine tau positivity using two different tau PET tracers in individuals scanned head‐to‐head.MethodsWe studied 147 individuals from Head‐to‐Head Harmonization of Tau Tracers in Alzheimer's Disease (HEAD) study with tau tangle PET scans with [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK‐6240, and amyloid‐ß (Aß) PET. Tau deposition was measured with the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) of each agent in the Medial Temporal Lobe (MTL) and the Entorhinal Cortex (EC). To determine Tau positivity three different methods were used: >2.5 standard deviations (SD) than the mean of the young, >1.5 SD mean of the cognitively unimpaired (CU) and >1.5 SD mean of CUAß‐.ResultsDemographic characteristics of the study population are reported in Table 1. Using the cutoff >2.5 SD mean of young, [18F]Flortaucipir was positive in 35 (23.8%) and 69 (46.9%) individuals in the EC and MTL, respectively. [18F]MK‐6240 was positive in 49 (33.3%) and 58 (39.5%) individuals in EC and in MTL. Using >1.5 SD mean of CUAß‐, [18F]Flortaucipir was positive in 38 (25.9%) and 45 (30.6%) individuals in EC and MTL, while [18F]MK‐6240 was positive in 51 (34.7%) and 50 (34.0%) in EC and in MTL (Figure 1).ConclusionsOur findings indicate variations in tau positivity when employing different methods based on either the young or CUAß‐. [18F]Flortaucipir exhibited a higher rate of positive results when the method based on young individuals was applied in the MTL. Conversely, [18F]MK‐6240 showed more consistent and generally higher positivity when other methods were used for cutoff determination and/or in the EC region. Further research with a larger sample size is required to gain a better understanding of the optimal cutoff determination methods for these tracers.

AbstractBackgroundIdentification of cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals who may progress to mild cognitive impairment (MCI), is a pressing issue in the Alzheimer’s disease (AD) field, since therapeutic interventions may be more effective in the absence of cognitive impairment and neurodegeneration. CU individuals positive for amyloid and tau PET are very likely in the AD pathway. In out‐patient cognitive screening, we use rapid and simple tests such as The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) ‐ a composite of executive, visuospatial, naming, attention, language, abstraction, delayed recall, and orientation performances. We hypothesize that sub‐categorizing the CU group based on the presence of amyloid (A) and tau (T) pathologies, as measured by PET, can reveal subtle cognitive deficits, even in a clinical test with low sensitivity such as MoCA.MethodWe included 88 CU [defined as CDR global score of 0] older adults with available head‐to‐head MK6240 tau‐PET and Flortaucipir tracers from the ongoing HEAD multi‐site observational study. They also underwent Amyloid PET imaging using PiB or NAV4694. MoCA testing was done around the imaging time. To increase similarity with clinical practice, Amyloid and Tau PET positivity was defined using visual reads. Based on tracer uptake status, we categorized the individuals into A‐T‐, A‐T+, A+T‐ and A‐T‐ groups. Unpaired t‐test and one‐way ANOVA were used to test for significant differences between groups.Result2‐tailed p‐values were significant between the A‐T‐ group and the A+T+ group for MoCA total score [p: 0.0025 and p: 0.0025]. When we stratified MoCA in the different cognitive domains, we found that the results were driven by MoCA (memory) Delayed Recall score [p: 0.0007 and p: 0.0162]. A‐T+ vs A+T+ was also significant [p: 0.0099] for MoCA Delayed Recall. Both tau tracers (MK6240 and Flortaucipir) showed similar performance for determining T+ and identifying cognitive decline.ConclusionMoCA, a simple and commonly administered in‐office neuropsychological test, can detect subtle cognitive dysfunction in CU older adults who are Aß and tau positive (A+/T+). These CU A+/T+ individuals are likely on the path to developing AD dementia.

AbstractBackgroundUtilizing PET amyloid‐beta (Aß) and tau for staging Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) has demonstrated potential in identifying individuals with varying degrees of disease severity, applicable to both clinical trials and practice. However, the diverse binding characteristics of tau tracers pose challenges to the application of this staging across different ligands. In this study, we evaluate a novel staging framework proposed by the AA working group, employing Aß PET and either [18F]MK6240 or [18F]Flortaucipir in individuals participating in a head‐to‐head study of tau PET tracers. This will provide insights into the robustness of this framework when applied across different tau ligands.MethodWe evaluated 154 people (89 CU and 65 CI), with MK6240, Flortaucipir, Aß‐PET, MRI. SUVRs used inferior cerebellar gray as reference. Participants were categorized in Aß positivity(A), using visual read, and tau positivity (T) in medial temporal lobe(MTL) and neocortex(NEO). Tau MTL(TMTL) and NEO positivity were defined as average +3 SD of youngs. NEO moderate(TMOD) and high(THIGH) was defined as below and above median SUVR of NEO‐positive individuals. Individuals were grouped as: A‐T‐, A+T‐, A+TMTL+(early), A+TMOD+(intermediary), and A+THIGH+(advanced).ResultsWe found that the distribution of the number of individuals across the five AD stages was comparable when using both MK6240 and Flortaucipir tracers (Figure 1). However, upon examining the concordance within each group, we found a low concordance of 30% (3/10) between tracers in the early tau stage (A+TMTL+). Concordance increased in the intermediary stage A+TMOD+, with a rate of 65% (9/14), and further increased to 79% (11/14) in the advanced stage (A+THIGH+). The A+T‐ group exhibited the highest concordance between tracer results, at 95% (21/22).ConclusionOur findings indicate that the application of this framework across different populations using different tau tracers can lead to a compatible distribution among groups. However, in a direct comparison, we noted that this did not necessarily result in high concordance between groups, as group shifts were observed that depended on the cutoffs used (data not shown). These results emphasize the necessity for harmonization of tau PET tracers prior to their utilization for stage determination.

AbstractBackgroundThe newly proposed criteria by the AA working group incorporates both biological and clinical stages to characterize the progression of AD. In this study, we aim to evaluate the agreement between these two complementary systems.MethodsUsing 188 participants from McGill TRIAD and 139 from the HEAD cohorts, we categorized participants into biological (0‐4) and clinical (0‐4) stages using amyloid PET, tau PET(MK‐6240), and clinical measures as described by the working group. Participants were then stratified into three categories: congruent (clinical = biological), higher in the biological stage (clinical < biological), and higher in the clinical stage (clinical > biological). In the TRIAD cohort, we further compared these groups for age, sex, years of education, vascular burden (WMH), microglial activation (PBR scan), Astrocyte reactivity (GFAP), amyloid load, tau load, and NPI‐Q scores using Welch two‐sided t‐test with FDR multiple comparison correction.ResultsIn the TRIAD cohort, 34% of participants were congruent, 24.5% had a higher clinical stage, and 41.5% had a higher biological stage. Meanwhile in the HEAD cohort 68.2% were congruent, 20.7% had a higher clinical stage, and 17% had a higher biological stage. TRIAD participants with a higher clinical stage had lower education (P = 0.02), more neuropsychiatric symptoms (P = 0.03), and a higher vascular burden (P = 0.03) (Table 1). As expected, people with higher biological stage had more amyloid(P<0.001), tau(P<0.001), and astrocyte reactivity(P<0.001) (Table 1, Figure 2).ConclusionsOur findings highlight important discordance between clinical and biological stages, which could be partially explained by cognitive reserve. This was supported by the protective effects of educational attainment in participants with a higher biological stage. Vascular burden played a major role in the cognitive impairment of individuals with higher clinical stages. Future studies should replicate these findings in larger more representative population‐based cohorts.