Insel, Philip S.

Abstract INTRODUCTION We standardized positron emission tomography (PET) data across multiple cohorts and tracers to characterize the frequency of amyloid and tau PET severity along the clinical continuum. METHODS Clinical stage was defined using cohort‐specific criteria and included cognitively unimpaired (CU), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia. Amyloid severity was staged using Centiloids (CL). Tau severity was staged using a hierarchical Braak‐based schema. The cumulative probabilities of PET‐based stages were estimated using ordinal logistic regressions. RESULTS Among 10,396 individuals (mean [standard deviation] age: 71.9 [7.1] years), amyloid levels ≥ 25 CL increased with age among CU and MCI, while amyloid levels ≥ 100 CL were most common in dementia. In 3295 with tau PET, tau severity increased with amyloid and clinical stage and showed complex associations with age. Within each clinical stage, the full spectrum of amyloid and tau PET severity was observed. DISCUSSION PET‐based staging revealed heterogeneous amyloid and tau burden along the clinical continuum. Highlights PET‐based staging is feasible across multiple cohorts and PET tracers. There is heterogeneity in amyloid and tau severity across the clinical spectrum. The frequency of amyloid and tau PET severity increased with clinical severity. The likelihood of tau PET severity differed by age, amyloid, and clinical severity.

Abstract Background The Joint Propagation Model (JPM)‐based CenTauR scale was recently introduced to harmonize tau‐PET quantification across different radiotracers. This study examined how CenTauR harmonization enhances the comparability of tau‐PET quantification across matched cohorts using different tracers. The evaluation focused on three key aspects: (1) comparing tau‐PET positivity rates as defined by CenTauR, (2) evaluating its diagnostic accuracy for symptomatic AD, and (3) analyzing longitudinal changes in tau‐PET rates over time. Method The JPM, developed by the CPAD‐led Tau PET Harmonization Working Group (Leuzy et al., Alzheimers Dement. 2024; Figure 1A), models relationships between anchor point subjects and head‐to‐head tau‐PET SUVR data onto the CenTauR scale, providing conversion equations for multiple tracers. JPM equations were applied to [ 18 F]flortaucipir SUVR (Meta‐temporal ROI) data from 561 cognitively impaired participants in the ADNI and OASIS‐3 studies. Using ROC analysis, we determined the CenTauR cut‐off for positivity (T+) that maximized the Youden index for discriminating between FDA‐approved positive/negative visual reads. Three separate cohorts, scanned using [ 18 F]flortaucipir (ADNI), [ 18 F]MK‐6240 (CPAS), and [ 18 F]RO‐948 (BioFINDER‐2), were matched 1:1 by age, MMSE, amyloid‐β, and clinical diagnosis. CenTauR‐based metrics were compared across these cohorts. Result A cut‐off of 18 CenTauRs was found to optimally classify [ 18 F]flortaucipir PET visual reads (Figure 1B). The matching procedure identified 1089 participants (363 per cohort). The frequency of T+ using the 18 CenTauRs cut‐off for the Meta‐Temporal ROI was highly comparable across tracers across groups, except for the Aβ‐positive cognitively unimpaired group, where variability was more pronounced due to a smaller sample size (Figure 2A). Similarly, tau‐PET discriminative accuracy for symptomatic AD vs controls remained similar across [ 18 F]flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240 (Figure 2B). In a separate sample of 212 matched participants from ADNI ([ 18 F]flortaucipir) and AIBL ([ 18 F]MK‐6240) with baseline and 1‐year follow‐up tau‐PET scans, 1‐year change in CenTauRs was comparable (Figure 2C). An exploratory voxelwise transformation, utilizing the Meta‐Temporal conversion equation in a representative case scanned with both [ 18 F]flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240, demonstrates the potential for voxelwise CenTauR harmonization (Figure 3). Conclusion These analyses suggest that CenTauR harmonization increases the comparability of tau‐PET data acquired with different tracers. Additional validation analyses with larger cohorts including other radiotracers ([ 18 F]PI‐2620) are underway.

Abstract Background The Joint Propagation Model (JPM)‐based CenTauR scale was recently introduced to harmonize tau‐PET quantification across different radiotracers. This study examined how CenTauR harmonization enhances the comparability of tau‐PET quantification across matched cohorts using different tracers. The evaluation focused on three key aspects: (1) comparing tau‐PET positivity rates as defined by CenTauR, (2) evaluating its diagnostic accuracy for symptomatic AD, and (3) analyzing longitudinal changes in tau‐PET rates over time. Method The JPM, developed by the CPAD‐led Tau PET Harmonization Working Group (Leuzy et al., Alzheimers Dement. 2024; Figure 1A), models relationships between anchor point subjects and head‐to‐head tau‐PET SUVR data onto the CenTauR scale, providing conversion equations for multiple tracers. JPM equations were applied to [¹⁸F]flortaucipir SUVR (Meta‐temporal ROI) data from 561 cognitively impaired participants in the ADNI and OASIS‐3 studies. Using ROC analysis, we determined the CenTauR cut‐off for positivity (T+) that maximized the Youden index for discriminating between FDA‐approved positive/negative visual reads. Three separate cohorts, scanned using [¹⁸F]flortaucipir (ADNI), [¹⁸F]MK‐6240 (CPAS), and [¹⁸F]RO‐948 (BioFINDER‐2), were matched 1:1 by age, MMSE, amyloid‐β, and clinical diagnosis. CenTauR‐based metrics were compared across these cohorts. Result A cut‐off of 18 CenTauRs was found to optimally classify [ 18 F]flortaucipir PET visual reads (Figure 1B). The matching procedure identified 1089 participants (363 per cohort). The frequency of T+ using the 18 CenTauRs cut‐off for the Meta‐Temporal ROI was highly comparable across tracers across groups, except for the Aβ‐positive cognitively unimpaired group, where variability was more pronounced due to a smaller sample size (Figure 2A). Similarly, tau‐PET discriminative accuracy for symptomatic AD vs controls remained similar across [ 18 F]flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240 (Figure 2B). In a separate sample of 212 matched participants from ADNI ([¹⁸F]flortaucipir) and AIBL ([¹⁸F]MK‐6240) with baseline and 1‐year follow‐up tau‐PET scans, 1‐year change in CenTauRs was comparable (Figure 2C). An exploratory voxelwise transformation, utilizing the Meta‐Temporal conversion equation in a representative case scanned with both [¹⁸F]flortaucipir and [¹⁸F]MK‐6240, demonstrates the potential for voxelwise CenTauR harmonization (Figure 3). Conclusion These analyses suggest that CenTauR harmonization increases the comparability of tau‐PET data acquired with different tracers. Additional validation analyses with larger cohorts including other radiotracers ([¹⁸F]PI‐2620) are underway.

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.

AbstractBackgroundMixed model repeated measures (MMRM) is the most common analysis approach in clinical trials for Alzheimer’s disease. The model treats time as a categorical variable, which can be problematic when assessments occur off‐schedule, as including off‐schedule visits can induce bias, and excluding them ignores valuable information and violates the intention to treat principle. This problem has been exacerbated by clinical trial visits which have been delayed due to the COVID19 pandemic. Since MMRM entails a mean parameter for each group and visit, the model can be inefficient for longer trials of Preclinical Alzheimer’s. As an alternative to MMRM, we propose a constrained longitudinal data analysis with natural cubic splines that treats time as continuous and uses test version effects to model the mean over time.MethodWe use model selection techniques to compare the predictive value of spline models to slope models, MMRM, and models that assume a proportional treatment effect using data from several completed trials. These trials include the ADCS trial of donepezil in MCI, trials of intranasal insulin and a fyn kinase inhibitor in mild Alzheimer’s dementia, and the A4 trial of solanezumab in Preclinical Alzheimer’s. Simulation studies assess the power and Type I error of these models for trials in Preclinical Alzheimer’s, MCI, and mild dementia.ResultThe spline model with ADAS‐Cog version effect attained the best predictive value for the trials in mild dementia. The proportional model was preferred for the trial in MCI, but the proportional effect assumption was violated, and the treatment effect estimate was in the wrong direction. Considering that the spline with two degrees of freedom and version effect provide fits that are similar to MMRM in Figure 1, we concluded that two degrees of freedom appear to be sufficient to capture enough of the general trend to assess the treatment effect. AIC results from the A4 Study will be considered and included after the study is completed in Spring 2023.ConclusionThe spline model is shown to have better predictive value and precision in real datasets and has better power and Type I error control in a variety of simulation scenarios.

Abstract Mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) is the most common analysis approach used in clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease and other progressive diseases measured with continuous outcomes over time. The model treats time as a categorical variable, which allows an unconstrained estimate of the mean for each study visit in each randomized group. Categorizing time in this way can be problematic when assessments occur off‐schedule, as including off‐schedule visits can induce bias, and excluding them ignores valuable information and violates the intention to treat principle. This problem has been exacerbated by clinical trial visits which have been delayed due to the COVID19 pandemic. As an alternative to MMRM, we propose a constrained longitudinal data analysis with natural cubic splines that treats time as continuous and uses test version effects to model the mean over time. Compared to categorical‐time models like MMRM and models that assume a proportional treatment effect, the spline model is shown to be more parsimonious and precise in real clinical trial datasets, and has better power and Type I error in a variety of simulation scenarios.

Background: Cognitive impairment (CI) is a key feature of late life depression (LLD), but the contribution of underlying neurodegenerative pathology remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate cognitive dysfunction in LLD relative to a sample of nondepressed (ND) older adults with matched levels of memory impairment and amyloid-β (Aβ) burden. Methods: Participants included 120 LLD and 240 ND older adults matched on age, education, sex, Mini-Mental State Exam, mild cognitive impairment diagnosis, and PET Aβ burden. Results: LLD showed higher rates of impairment relative to ND with 54.6% of the LLD sample demonstrating impairment in at least one cognitive domain compared to 42.9% of controls ( H = 7.13, p = 0.008). LLD had poorer performance and higher rates of impairment on Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test learning and memory compared to controls. In the overall sample, Aβ positivity was associated with worse performance on Logical Memory I ( p = 0.044), Logical Memory II ( p = 0.011), and Trail Making Test –B ( p = 0.032), and APOE ɛ4 genotype was associated with worse performance on Logical Memory I ( p = 0.022); these relationships did not differ between LLD and ND. Conclusion: LLD showed higher rates of CI driven by focal deficits in verbal learning and memory. Alzheimer’s disease (AD) biomarkers were associated with worse performance on timed set-shifting and story learning and memory, and these relationships were not impacted by depression status. These findings suggest that AD may account for a portion of previously reported multi-domain CI in LLD and highlight the potential for AD to confound studies of cognition in LLD.

AbstractIntroductionAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) is now in its 10th year. The primary objective of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) core of ADNI has been to improve methods for clinical trials in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related disorders.MethodsWe review the contributions of the MRI core from present and past cycles of ADNI (ADNI‐1, ‐Grand Opportunity and ‐2). We also review plans for the future‐ADNI‐3.ResultsContributions of the MRI core include creating standardized acquisition protocols and quality control methods; examining the effect of technical features of image acquisition and analysis on outcome metrics; deriving sample size estimates for future trials based on those outcomes; and piloting the potential utility of MR perfusion, diffusion, and functional connectivity measures in multicenter clinical trials.DiscussionOver the past decade the MRI core of ADNI has fulfilled its mandate of improving methods for clinical trials in AD and will continue to do so in the future.

AbstractIntroductionAlzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by the accumulation of β‐amyloid (Aβ) associated with brain atrophy and cognitive decline. The functional form to model the association between Aβ and regional brain atrophy has not been well defined. To determine the relationship between Aβ and atrophy, we compared the performance of the usual dichotomization of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ to identify subjects as Aβ+ and Aβ− with a trilinear spline model of CSF Aβ.MethodsOne hundred and eighty‐three subjects with mild cognitive impairment and 108 cognitively normal controls with baseline CSF Aβ and up to 4 years of longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative were analyzed using mixed‐effects regression. Piecewise‐linear splines were used to evaluate the nonlinear nature of the association between CSF Aβ and regional atrophy and to identify points of acceleration of atrophy with respect to Aβ. Several parameterizations of CSF Aβ were compared using likelihood ratio tests and the Akaike information criterion. Periods of acceleration of atrophy in which subjects transition from CSF Aβ negativity to CSF Aβ positivity were estimated from the spline models and tested for significance.ResultsSpline models resulted in better fits for many temporal and parietal regions compared with the dichotomous models. The trilinear model showed that periods of acceleration of atrophy varied greatly by region with early changes seen in the insula, amygdala, precuneus, hippocampus, and other temporal regions, occurring before the clinical threshold for CSF Aβ positivity.DiscussionThe use of piecewise‐linear splines provides an improved model of the nonlinear association between CSF Aβ and regional atrophy in regions implicated in the progression of AD. The important biological finding of this work is that some brain regions show periods of accelerated volume loss well before the CSF Aβ42 threshold. This implies that signs of brain atrophy develop before the current conventional definition of “preclinical AD”.