Schneider, Julie A.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Few African American (AA) donors have been included in post mortem Alzheimer's disease (AD) studies compared to European‐ancestry (EA) individuals. METHODS We generated transcriptome‐wide bulk pre‐frontal cortex (PFC) gene expression data from 125 AA donors with neuropathologically determined AD and 82 AA controls. RESULTS Transcriptome‐wide significant differential expression was observed with 482 genes. The most significant, ADAMTS2 , showed 1.52 times higher expression in AD cases ( p = 2.96x10 −8 ). Comparison of findings with those from a recent gene expression study of EA brain donors revealed substantial concordance, including ADAMTS2 . Other associations not observed in EA results may be especially relevant to AD risk in the AA population. Examination of AA AD GWAS‐implicated variants identified several expression quantitative trait loci. CONCLUSION This first large‐scale AA brain AD gene expression study identified many differentially expressed genes, including ADAMTS2 , and supports gene expression as a molecular pathway underlying the impact of several AA AD risk variants. Highlights We performed the largest African American brain tissue Alzheimer's disease (AD) gene expression study. Expression differences for 482 genes, notably ADAMTS2 , were study‐wide significant. Many significant differentially expressed genes are involved in energy metabolism. Several previously known AD‐associated variants in African Americans are eQTLs. These results advance knowledge of the genetic basis of AD in the AA population.

Objective To establish a framework for validating candidate biomarkers of cerebral small vessel diseases (SVD) associated with cognitive impairment and characterize individuals enrolled by the MarkVCID2 consortium under this framework. Methods Participants age 60 to 90 years were enrolled across 17 MarkVCID2 sites. Recruitment was targeted to enrich in cognitive symptoms (mild dementia, mild cognitive impairment, subjective cognitive decline), defined risk factors (diabetes mellitus, advanced hypertension), and Black/African American, White, and Hispanic/Latino subgroups. Enrolled participants underwent baseline visits that included cognitive testing, multimodal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and biofluid collection. Provisional risk for SVD‐related cognitive decline was estimated primarily by baseline cognitive symptoms plus SVD risk factors. Adjudicated risk status was estimated by cognitive symptoms plus presence of moderate‐to‐severe white matter hyperintensities, microbleeds, or lacunes on baseline MRI. Results MarkVCID2 enrolled 1883 individuals age 73.4 ± 7.5 years, 65.0% female, 24.2% Hispanic, and 27.1% non‐Hispanic Black. Among enrollees, 44.8% were provisionally designated high‐risk. After baseline MRI, 48.5% were categorized as adjudicated high‐risk status, with substantial recategorization both from low‐ to high‐risk (primarily because of MRI lesions without SVD risk factors) and high‐ to low‐risk (primarily suspected cognitive impairment at screening not confirmed by baseline testing). Interpretation MarkVCID2 baseline data indicate successful enrollment of diverse individuals enriched in factors associated with SVD‐related cognitive decline. Changes over 3 years of longitudinal follow‐up will be analyzed to validate the candidate biomarkers for 2 projected contexts of use: subject selection (identifying likelihood of future SVD progression) and study outcome (efficiently measuring SVD progression). ANN NEUROL 2026;99:449–458

AbstractBackgroundAlthough the rate of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in African‐ancestry (AA) Americans is higher than that of persons from European‐ancestry (EA) populations, AA participants have been underrepresented in AD neuropathological studies.MethodUtilizing the AD Research Centers (ADRC) infrastructure, we obtained AA donor pre‐frontal cortex (PFC) tissue from brain repositories of 12 ADRC and generated bulk RNA sequencing (RNA‐seq) data for 179 samples that met QC and inclusion criteria. Previously generated PFC RNAseq data were obtained for 28 additional AA donors from the Columbia University ADRC. Differential gene expression was evaluated among 125 donors with a neuropathological diagnosis of AD (NIA‐Reagan intermediate or high likelihood) and 82 neuropathologically confirmed controls using regression models including covariates for age at death, sex, cell‐type frequencies, and RNA integrity number (RIN) calculated with Limma. FDR‐corrected p‐values (padj) were calculated to control for the 33,611 genes examined.ResultA total of 482 genes surpassed the multiple‐testing threshold. The most significant, ADAMTS2 (p = 2.96 × 10‐8, padj = 0.001), showed increased expression in AD cases (see Table/Figure). We note that ADAMTS2 was differentially expressed in a prior EA study of neuropathologically confirmed AD cases and controls (Panitch et al. Molecular Psychiatry 2021). Additionally, a recent analysis of cognitive resilience in EA neuropathological AD cases identified a strong association with ADAMTS2 (See Li et al. AAIC2024 abstract). Of the differentially expressed genes observed in the Panitch et al. EA study, 385 (35%) were nominally significant,65 (5.8%) were corrected significant, and most (89%) of these genes had the same effect direction in the AA cohort. Some of the observed associations appear to be AA specific (e.g., EFR3B, IRS4, and CA12; see Table). Additionally, we found nominally significant (p<0.05) associations with expression of APOE (Log2 fold change [L2FC = ‐0.20, p = 0.012) and several other established AD genes including SORL1 (L2FC = ‐0.10, p = 0.014) and IGF1R(L2FC = 0.11, p = 0.0013).ConclusionThis largest‐ever (to our knowledge) gene expression study of AD in postmortem brain tissue from AA donors implicates many more genes as having a role in AD in this population than previously identified in genome‐wide association studies and provides insight into trans‐ancestry differences risk for AD.

AbstractBackgroundDigital pathology and machine learning (ML) workflows have paradigm shifting potential especially in the field of Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders. However, many institutions/centers may not have access to these technologies. To provide benchmark data, a survey was developed and distributed to National Institutes of Health’s Alzheimer’s Disease Centers (ADCs) in the United States.MethodSurvey questions covered topics such as: infrastructure (i.e. type of digital slide scanners used), funding sources (i.e. how the scanner was funded), and data management/storage (i.e. size of digital files). After development, review, and approval by the ADC digital pathology working group, the survey was distributed via email to 35 past and current ADC directors and/or ADC neuropathology core leaders. Participation in the survey was completely voluntary and answers did not contain any personal data.ResultThe survey generated over a 90% response rate, and the majority of those who completed the survey were neuropathology core leaders; 81% stated their ADC had access to a digital slide scanner, most common brand being Aperio/Leica. One third of respondents stated there was a fee for service to utilize the scanner. For digital pathology and/or ML resources, 40% of respondents stated none are supported in any way by their ADC. To cover the purchase and operation of the scanner, 50% stated they had institutional support. Many were unsure of the approximate average scanned file size of digital images (37%) and total amount of storage space that files occupied (50%). Many (75%) were aware of other departments at their institution working with digital pathology and/or ML, but a similar percentage was unaware of multi‐university or industry partnerships.ConclusionThese results demonstrate many ADCs have access to a digital slide scanner and had institutional support to cover the purchase. However, further investigation is needed to understand hurdles and barriers for implementing both digital pathology and ML workflows aiding in standardized methods across ADCs.

AbstractFrom its inception in 1980, advancement of research was one of the primary missions of the Alzheimer's Association (also known as Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association) in addition to leading in family caregiver support, better care, public education, and awareness. Over the past 30 years, the Association has grown and expanded its engagement with the scientific community. In the past 10 years, its research budget has more than doubled, greatly increasing the number of research grants funded and the number of strategic projects supported. The leadership and members of the Medical and Scientific Advisory Council recognized that the growth of the Alzheimer's Association and the expanded mission of Medical & Scientific Relations Division necessitated a change in the mission and charge of the external scientific advisory function to the Association.