Kantarci, Kejal

Abstract Background Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), characterized by the accumulation of amyloid‐beta in the cerebrovasculature, affects blood vessel integrity leading to brain hemorrhages and an accelerated cognitive decline in Alzheimer's Disease (AD) patients. Our previous genome‐wide association study (GWAS) identified a LINC‐PINT splice variant associated with lower CAA levels in individuals without the APOE e4 allele and higher levels of LINC‐PINT expression in the brain of AD donors. In this study, we expand our GWAS to include additional donors with AD and those lacking significant AD neuropathology (non‐AD), with available CAA scores. Method In our prior study we assessed 853 AD donors. We expanded this by addition of genetic data from 550 AD and 502 non‐AD donors from the Mayo Clinic Brain Bank, scored for CAA. We performed QC and imputation (TOPMED) of all datasets. We conducted GWAS in AD only ( N = 1,363), non‐AD only, and all donors ( N = 1,865) by testing imputed variant dosages for association with square root transformed CAA using linear regression, adjusting for relevant covariates. To assess associations in the context of major CAA risk factors, we performed interaction analysis with APOEe4 presence and sex; and pursued stratified analyses. Result Variants at the APOE locus were identified as the most significant in our study. In addition, several other variants approached genome‐wide significance after adjusting for AD neuropathology (Braak stage and Thal phase). The LINC‐PINT splice variant remained associated with lower CAA scores in AD donors without the APOEe4 risk allele . To enhance the robustness of our findings, we are pursuing further expansion of our study cohort to include other available datasets. To explore putative functional consequences of key variants we are collecting peripheral gene expression measures in participants from Mayo Clinic with neuroimaging measures including microhemorrhages. Conclusion We expect this study will provide further insights into the genetic architecture underlying risk for CAA, both in the context of significant AD pathology, and without. Characterization of genetic variants and their functional outcomes may lead to new avenues of research aimed at identifying biomarkers and therapies to treat CAA, a common co‐pathology in those with and without AD.

Abstract Background Brain age models are increasingly being used as measures of brain health and neurodegeneration. These models can be deep learning (DL) based and/or classical methods and provide a brain age gap (BAG) which is the difference between chronological and predicted brain age. Our goal was to develop DL‐based scanner invariant brain age models that can be applied in aging and dementia studies even when there are scanner changes that may hinder longitudinal follow‐up. Method We identified 3374 cognitively unimpaired (CU) participants with T1 scans from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA). A subset of 863 CU amyloidosis negative (PiB‐PET cutoff < 25 Centiloid) and no history of diabetes and hypertension was selected (CU‐noVAβ). We built two models – Model‐A trained on CU‐noVAβ, and Model‐B trained on all CU. We included 453 MCSA MCI participants as test set for both models. We used 113 participants (74 CU, 28 MCI, 10 dementia) from MCSA and Mayo ADRC with scans from two different vendors (scanned within a week of each other) for testing cross‐vendor/scanner differences (cross‐vendor data). The two unique features of our model included histogram matching and scanner type as an input to the DenseNet model for training (Figure 1). Result In the data, the inclusion of scanner as an input decreased the prediction of mean age differences between the scanners (Model‐A=2.17 years; Model‐B=1.71 years) (Figure 2). The mean absolute error (MAE=absolute value of BAG) for Model‐A in MCI was 5.72 years and Model‐B in MCI was 4.06 years, consistent across scanners (Figure 3). Longitudinal prediction increased with age (Model‐A slope=0.53; Model‐B slope=0.63). Conclusion We found that training on all CU (Model B) rather than a subset CU‐noVAβ (Model A) allowed for the DenseNet model to backpropagate on more variable data which lowered MAE in prediction error between scanners and lowered MAE for MCIs. Histogram matching and scanner as an input to the brain age model accounted for scanner changes and resulted in scanner invariant longitudinal brain age estimation.

Abstract Background Some data suggest that neuroinflammation may be associated with pro‐inflammatory states in the body. Systemic, proinflammatory cytokines (TNFα, IL‐1, IL‐6, etc.) are produced by a variety of comorbidities. Neuroinflammation has been shown to be associated with the accumulation of amyloid in the brain (Becher, Heneka). We hypothesized that systemic cytokine production could be associated with neuroinflammation and thereby be related to brain amyloid accumulation. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between neuroinflammation, amyloid accumulation and systemic cytokines. Method 90 participants from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA) received a fasting cytokine panel over a 5‐year span where IL‐1, IL‐6, IL‐10, TNFa levels were measured. Participants were divided into four groups: cognitively unimpaired with normal levels of amyloid (CU A‐, n = 25), cognitively unimpaired with elevated amyloid (CU A+, n = 25), and mild cognitively impaired (MCI) with amyloid positive (MCI A+, n = 25), and Alzheimer's disease (AD) with elevated amyloid (AD A+, n = 15). To compare regional standardized uptake value ratio (SUVr) from neuroinflammation PET based on amyloid status (A+ vs A‐) and the four cytokines, Spearman's rank correlation and Fishers r‐to‐z transformations were used to assess pairwise group differences. Result Using Spearman's rank correlation and Fishers r‐to‐z transformations, no strong relationship was found between systemic inflammation and neuroinflammation. While comparing CUA‐ vs CUA+ in Figure 1, three regions (supplementary motor area, frontal superior medial lobe, and middle cingulate cortex) showed a significant difference ( p < 0.05). However, Figure 2 showed an overarching trend bias towards significance across most regions in IL10, IL6, and TNFa. Conclusion Although significant relationships between systemic inflammation, brain amyloid and neuroinflammation were limited, the data show an overarching trend bias in broad brain regions, suggesting that further analyses are needed, possibly with larger sample sizes, to assess the relationship of regional neuroinflammation and amyloid to systemic inflammation. Future analyses could also regress out factors like sex, age, and genotype to further proinflammatory cytokine research.

Abstract Background Neuropathologic evaluation is essential for diagnosing and treating dementia, but definitive diagnoses is only available after post‐mortem brain autopsy. Positron emission tomography (PET) offers a potential in vivo proxy for predicting neuropathology. This study proposes a semi‐supervised learning (SSL) model using a single FDG‐PET image to predict underlying neuropathology. Method The SSL model leverages a self‐organized graph structure based on a patient similarity network (PSN) created from 1,495 FDG‐PET images across the aging and neurodegenerative spectrum. Each patient is represented by a node, with edges indicating image similarity derived from principal component analysis features and cosine similarity weights. The PSN structure connects 20 nearest neighbors. Neuropathologic labels were available for 204 autopsied patients. The Poisson Learning Method was employed to propagate labels from these annotated nodes to unlabeled nodes, guided by the PSN structure. FDG‐PET images were collected from clinical and research participants at the Mayo Clinic and processed using an MRI‐free pipeline. Neuropathologic labels were assigned based on widely accepted diagnostic criteria. Leave‐one‐out cross‐validation (LOOCV) was used to assess model performance. Results The confusion matrix demonstrated high accuracy in predicting Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal lobar degeneration with tau inclusions, and Lewy body disease pathology. A Sankey diagram and label distribution analysis revealed strong correlations between clinical and predicted neuropathologic labels. Conclusion This study highlights the potential of a graph‐based SSL pipeline to predict neuropathological changes using FDG‐PET imaging data, despite limited pathology labels. The findings underscore the value of SSL in bridging the gap between abundant neuroimaging data and scarce neuropathologic labels, contributing to improved dementia diagnosis and understanding.