Lazar, Evelyn B

ObjectiveThis study was undertaken to apply established and emerging cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers to improve diagnostic accuracy in patients with rapidly progressive dementia (RPD). Overlap in clinical presentation and results of diagnostic tests confounds etiologic diagnosis in patients with RPD. Objective measures are needed to improve diagnostic accuracy and to recognize patients with potentially treatment‐responsive causes of RPD.MethodsBiomarkers of Alzheimer disease neuropathology (amyloid‐β 42/40 ratio, phosphorylated tau [p‐tau181, p‐tau231]), neuroaxonal/neuronal injury (neurofilament light chain [NfL], visinin‐like protein‐1 [VILIP‐1], total tau), neuroinflammation (chitinase‐3‐like protein [YKL‐40], soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 [sTREM2], glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP], monocyte chemoattractant protein‐1 [MCP‐1]), and synaptic dysfunction (synaptosomal‐associated protein 25kDa, neurogranin) were measured in CSF obtained at presentation from 78 prospectively accrued patients with RPD due to neurodegenerative, vascular, and autoimmune/inflammatory diseases; 35 age‐ and sex‐matched patients with typically progressive neurodegenerative disease; and 72 cognitively normal controls. Biomarker levels were compared across etiologic diagnoses, by potential treatment responsiveness, and between patients with typical and rapidly progressive presentations of neurodegenerative disease.ResultsAlzheimer disease biomarkers were associated with neurodegenerative causes of RPD. High NfL, sTREM2, and YKL‐40 and low VILIP‐1 identified patients with autoimmune/inflammatory diseases. MCP‐1 levels were highest in patients with vascular causes of RPD. A multivariate model including GFAP, MCP‐1, p‐tau181, and sTREM2 identified the 44 patients with treatment‐responsive causes of RPD with 89% accuracy. Minimal differences were observed between typical and rapidly progressive presentations of neurodegenerative disease.InterpretationSelected CSF biomarkers at presentation were associated with etiologic diagnoses and treatment responsiveness in patients with heterogeneous causes of RPD. The ability of cross‐sectional biomarkers to inform upon mechanisms that drive rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disease is less clear. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:299–313

AbstractBackground and purposeReal‐time quaking‐induced conversion (RT‐QuIC) assays offer a sensitive and specific means for detection of prions, although false negative results are recognized in clinical practice. We profile the clinical, laboratory, and pathologic features associated with false negative RT‐QuIC assays and extend these to frame the diagnostic approach to patients with suspected prion disease.MethodsA total of 113 patients with probable or definite prion disease were assessed at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN; Jacksonville, FL; Scottsdale, AZ) or Washington University School of Medicine (Saint Louis, MO) from 2013 to 2021. RT‐QuIC testing for prions was performed in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) at the National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center (Cleveland, OH).ResultsInitial RT‐QuIC testing was negative in 13 of 113 patients (sensitivity = 88.5%). RT‐QuIC negative patients were younger (median = 52.0 years vs. 66.1 years, p < 0.001). Other demographic and presenting features, and CSF cell count, protein, and glucose levels were similar in RT‐QuIC negative and positive patients. Frequency of 14‐3‐3 positivity (4/13 vs. 77/94, p < 0.001) and median CSF total tau levels were lower in RT‐QuIC negative patients (2517 vs. 4001 pg/mL, p = 0.020), and time from symptom onset to first presentation (153 vs. 47 days, p = 0.001) and symptomatic duration (710 vs. 148 days, p = 0.001) were longer.ConclusionsRT‐QuIC is a sensitive yet imperfect measure necessitating incorporation of other test results when evaluating patients with suspected prion disease. Patients with negative RT‐QuIC had lower markers of neuronal damage (CSF total tau and protein 14‐3‐3) and longer symptomatic duration of disease, suggesting that false negative RT‐QuIC testing associates with a more indolent course.