Rosas, H. Diana

Objectives Directly compare the brain glucose patterns seen with [F‐18] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) between 2 genetically determined forms of Alzheimer's disease: Down syndrome (DS) and autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease (ADAD). Methods Cross‐sectional analyses of FDG were performed in individuals with DS (n = 76) from the Alzheimer Biomarker Consortium‐Down Syndrome (ABC‐DS), ADAD (n = 297), and neurotypical familial controls (n = 188) from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN). Within‐group linear regression models and generalized additive models were performed for select regional FDG uptake measures (isthmus cingulate and inferior parietal, precuneus, middle temporal gyrus, and precentral gyrus). Age, sex, apolipoprotein (APOE) ε4 carrier status, and cortical amyloid burden were included within these analyses. Results Even 20 years before expected onset of clinical symptoms, FDG uptake was lower for DS compared to neurotypical familial controls ( p < 0.01). ADAD baseline FDG was similar to neurotypical familial controls until 7 years before expected symptom onset. Both symptomatic individuals with DS and ADAD had lower FDG compared to neurotypical familial controls ( p < 0.01). A higher amyloid burden was associated with lower FDG for both genetic forms, with similar rates of decline in FDG uptake for DS and ADAD who were amyloid positive. Interpretation Brain glucose metabolism is substantially lower for people with DS, even in individuals who are cognitively stable. The patterns of FDG decline are distinct in these 2 genetically determined forms of AD. The diagnostic utility of FDG‐PET is specific to the genetic form of AD. ANN NEUROL 2025;98:1237–1248

AbstractBackgroundTriplication of the APP allele in Down syndrome (DS) leads to excess amyloid production and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) related cognitive decline. Key biomarkers (amyloid, tau, neurodegeneration) can identify pathological processes that occur before clinical symptoms and more precisely stage adults with DS along the AD continuum. Previous research has used changes in cortical thickness (CT) as an indicator of neurodegeneration in autosomal‐dominant AD1, but not DS‐related AD. It is unclear when and where cortical thinning occurs along the AD continuum in DS and if these differences are associated with increasing AD pathology.MethodCross‐sectional analysis compared DS participants from the Alzheimer Biomarkers Consortium‐Down Syndrome (106 amyloid‐/cognitively unimpaired, nonclinical, 20% reserved for receiver‐operating characteristic, ROC, analyses; 45 amyloid+/cognitively unimpaired, preclinical; 27 amyloid+/cognitively impaired, clinical) who had amyloid positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Amyloid positivity was defined using standardized uptake value ratio (partial volume corrected) cortical mean values (1.42/1.19 for PIB/AV452) and impairment was based on consensus diagnosis. CT differences between nonclinical and clinical groups were calculated in FreeSurfer v5.3 for multiple thresholds (p<.05/.01/.005/.001/.0005/.0001) using a cluster‐wise false discovery rate of .001, corrected across hemispheres, after controlling for age and sex. CT values were extracted for each threshold and used in ROC analyses (nonclinical reserved participants compared against preclinical and preclinical compared against clinical) to identify key cortical regions that best discriminated amyloid positivity and between unimpaired and impaired.ResultSignificant decreases in parietal and inferior temporal CT were observed between nonclinical and clinical (Figures 1 and 2). ROC analyses identified regions in the left (threshold .05) and right (threshold .005) hemispheres that best differentiated nonclinical from preclinical. Observed area under the curves (AUCs) of .772 and .830 exceeded those previously reported for autosomal‐dominant AD (.547/.540)1. Analyses differentiating preclinical from clinical observed AUCs of .786 for left (threshold .0005) and .770 for right (threshold .0005) hemispheres.ConclusionCT differences primarily within posterior cortical regions differentiated adults with DS by amyloid status and cognitive impairment. CT differences were more diffuse for amyloid positivity but more focal for impairment.1. Dincer (2020). NeuroImage: Clinical, 28, 102491.2. Su (2019). Alzheimer’s Dement, 11, 180‐190.

AbstractBackgroundAdults with Down Syndrome (DS) develop Alzheimer disease (AD)‐like pathology and dementia as they age. This is attributed to triplication of the amyloid precursor protein gene. Recent work demonstrated that amyloid is elevated in DS and accumulates in a similar topography to autosomal dominant AD (ADAD). Tau accumulation is the second hallmark of AD and may be measured using tau positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. The pattern of tau accumulation remains unknown in DS.MethodIn a cross‐sectional analysis we evaluated amyloid and tau positron emission tomography (PET) in 124 participants with DS (109 cognitively stable, 8 symptomatic, 7 no consensus), 29 ADAD mutation carriers (26 asymptomatic, 3 symptomatic), and 201 cognitively normal non‐mutation carriers (CN). Regional cortical standard uptake value ratios (SUVR) for tau imaging were obtained and compared by cognitive status. Similarly, regional cortical amyloid SUVR were obtained and converted to centiloids. We then compared the magnitude of tau burden as well as spatial spread of tau across groups relative to amyloid burden.ResultCompared to CN, tau PET binding was elevated in participants with (µDS = 2.12 ± 0.22 SUVR, µADAD = 2.52 ± 0.37 SUVR) and without (µDS = 1.24 ± 0.15 SUVR, µADAD = 1.16 ± 0.19 SUVR) cognitive changes. For both groups, tau increased with increasing amyloid (centiloids). In some regions, DS had greater tau burden for a given amyloid level (centiloids) (Figure 1). There was increased spatial distribution of tau throughout the brain for participants with DS compared to CN. In contrast, tau burden was more focal in participants with ADAD with tau primarily elevated in posterior regions (Figure 2).ConclusionWhile tau burden was higher with symptomatic disease for both groups, significant differences existed in the overall amount and spatial spread. Tau spread was greatest in participants with DS and more diffuse compared to ADAD. These results indicate a substantial tau burden is present in DS, and suggest not only anti‐amyloid but also tau‐reducing agents should be considered for treating cognitive decline in adults with DS.