Snyder, Heather M.

AbstractBackgroundThere is limited information on biomarker‐defined Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology in community‐recruited individuals of diverse racial and ethnic groups. Here, we assessed the association of race/ethnicity with baseline biomarkers and cognitive measures and hypothesized a lower impact of AD pathology in non‐Hispanic White (nHW) participants in the U.S. POINTER study clinical trial, which evaluates the benefits of a multidomain lifestyle intervention on cognition of community‐recruited at‐risk elderly individuals.MethodWe included 879 participants from the U.S. POINTER study enrolled in the imaging substudy (∼50% of participants) who self‐identified as nHW (n=644), African American/Black (AA/B, n=132), Asian (n=29), and Hispanic (n=74). Outcomes measures included global Aβ pathology (18F‐florbetaben), temporal meta‐ROI tau (18F‐MK‐6240), MRI‐measured white matter hyperintensity volume (WMH) volumes, global clinical dementia rating (gCDR), and global, executive, and memory standardized cognitive scores. The nHW participants were selected as reference. Power transformations normalized skewed distributions. Multivariable linear regressions include age, sex, education, Framingham risk score, and area deprivation index (ADI) as covariates.ResultAA/B harbored lower WMHs, and meta‐temporal tau ROI values. In the full model, 0.5 gCDR participants had higher centiloid values, were more likely to be AA/B and Hispanic, and had a greater burden of WMHs. In addition, higher centiloid values were associated with a 0.5 gCDR in all groups except for the AA/B participants. Hispanic, AA/B, and Asian participants had lower cognitive scores than the nHW group. A higher ADI score was associated with lower global and executive cognitive scores but not with WMH volume or Aβ centiloid score.ConclusionThe analyses of the community‐based U.S. POINTER indicate that AA/B individuals present differences in AD and related dementia biomarker values. nHW had higher fully adjusted cognitive scores. These results indicate a significant heterogeneity in the cognitive testing performance and biomarker values of individuals at risk for dementia in the community.

Abstract INTRODUCTION The U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is evaluating lifestyle interventions in older adults at risk for cognitive decline and dementia. Here we characterize the baseline data set of the POINTER Imaging ancillary study. METHODS Participants underwent health and cognitive assessments and neuroimaging with multimodal positron emission tomography (PET) (beta‐amyloid [Aβ] and tau) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Framingham risk score (FRS) was used to quantify cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. RESULTS A total of 1052 participants (31% from underrepresented ethnoracial groups) were enrolled. Compared to Aβ−, Aβ+ (29%) participants were older, had higher apolipoprotein E ( APOE ) ε4 carriage rate and white matter hyperintensity volume, and greater temporal tau. FRS was related to MRI measures, but not AD biomarkers. FRS and tau had independent effects on cognition. DISCUSSION In this heterogenous, at‐risk cohort, CVD risk was related to more abnormal brain structure and poorer cognition, representing a putative non‐AD (Alzheimer's disease) pathway to brain injury and cognitive decline. Highlights The U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) cohort is enriched for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and poor lifestyle POINTER Imaging collected multimodal neuroimaging data in this unique, at‐risk cohort Amyloid burden was related to age, apolipoprotein E ( APOE ) ε4 carriage, and measures of disease progression Associations between amyloid and tau, and tau and cognition, were relatively weak CVD risk and tau pathology were independently related to memory

Abstract The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association convened three separate work groups in 2011 and single work groups in 2012 and 2018 to create recommendations for the diagnosis and characterization of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The present document updates the 2018 research framework in response to several recent developments. Defining diseases biologically, rather than based on syndromic presentation, has long been standard in many areas of medicine (e.g., oncology), and is becoming a unifying concept common to all neurodegenerative diseases, not just AD. The present document is consistent with this principle. Our intent is to present objective criteria for diagnosis and staging AD, incorporating recent advances in biomarkers, to serve as a bridge between research and clinical care. These criteria are not intended to provide step‐by‐step clinical practice guidelines for clinical workflow or specific treatment protocols, but rather serve as general principles to inform diagnosis and staging of AD that reflect current science. Highlights We define Alzheimer's disease (AD) to be a biological process that begins with the appearance of AD neuropathologic change (ADNPC) while people are asymptomatic. Progression of the neuropathologic burden leads to the later appearance and progression of clinical symptoms. Early‐changing Core 1 biomarkers (amyloid positron emission tomography [PET], approved cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, and accurate plasma biomarkers [especially phosphorylated tau 217]) map onto either the amyloid beta or AD tauopathy pathway; however, these reflect the presence of ADNPC more generally (i.e., both neuritic plaques and tangles). An abnormal Core 1 biomarker result is sufficient to establish a diagnosis of AD and to inform clinical decision making throughout the disease continuum. Later‐changing Core 2 biomarkers (biofluid and tau PET) can provide prognostic information, and when abnormal, will increase confidence that AD is contributing to symptoms. An integrated biological and clinical staging scheme is described that accommodates the fact that common copathologies, cognitive reserve, and resistance may modify relationships between clinical and biological AD stages.

AbstractBackgroundThe U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is a two‐year randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the effects of lifestyle interventions on older adults aged 60‐79 years. The POINTER Imaging ancillary study employs arterial spin labeling (ASL) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with two inversion times, enabling the mapping of arterial transit time (ATT) and the investigation of its relationship with dementia risk factors. This study examines the effect of the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) on ATT, which provides hemodynamic information on the cerebral vasculature.MethodA subset of POINTER Imaging participants (n = 134; F/M = 81/53; age = 68.1±5.1; FRS = 11.3±10.4) from two imaging sites underwent two ASL MRI scans during the baseline session. Two 3D Pulsed ASL scans were obtained with TI1 of 790ms and TI2 values of 2000ms or 2750ms, providing delay times (between labeling and imaging) of 1210ms or 1960ms. ATT, the time required for blood to travel from the neck to the tissue, was estimated in the range of 1210ms and 1960ms using a kinetic model (Figure 1). ATT maps were normalized to a standard space, and a voxel‐wise linear regression (ATT∼age+sex+log(FRS)) was performed on ATT maps in gray matter to assess the effect of FRS on ATT. To control false positives, clusters smaller than 1.4ml were removed based on a simulation with α = 0.05.ResultFigure 2 depicts three clusters found in the occipital, precuneus and frontal gray matter regions, all of which demonstrate a positive relationship between ATT and log(FRS). Participants with higher FRS exhibit prolonged mean ATT values in the clusters as shown in Figure 3. After stratifying into sex groups, both groups show the same direction.ConclusionAlthough the detectable range of ATT with two ASL scans was limited, the analysis suggests that an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, as quantified by the Framingham Risk Score, can serve as an indicator of potential cerebrovascular disease leading to prolonged ATT, which is associated with arterial stiffness, and vascular resistance. The clusters demonstrating the association between FRS and ATT are the brain regions that may have heightened vulnerability to vascular risk factors, according to previous studies.

AbstractBackgroundMulticentric initiatives to study brain cognition in the elderly offers us a unique collection of brain imaging data accompanied by detailed neuroclinical and neuropsychological evaluations. U.S. POINTER and LatAm‐FINGERS, part of the World Wide FINGERS, are both large‐scale investigations of lifestyle interventions and its impact on cognitive function. These large‐scale detailed data may offer an unprecedented opportunity to compare diverse populations.MethodBaseline MRI of subjects from multiple US centers (POINTER‐US), distributed in 5 geographical regions, and from 9 latin‐american countries (LatAm‐FINGERS). The protocols vary from basic (3D T1, 3D FLAIR,T2* GRE, Cor T2 hippocampus, DWI) to advanced which also included ASL, rs‐FMRI and DTI. Demographic information and clinical, cognitive and neuropsychological assessment were also included.ResultMRI data was collected from 662 participants in the United States (about 65% of the total anticipated U.S. POINTER neuroimaging sample) and from 542 subjects from 9 countries in latin‐america (about 80% of the total anticipated LatAm‐FINGERS neuroimaging sample), with around 1200 participants scanned (table1).All participants have 3D T1, 3D FLAIR, T2* GRE images and either DWI or DTI images.Comparative demographics from the 2 datasets shows similar mean age, a predominance of females, and slight differences in education (table 2). This will allow us to compare multiethnic and multicultural volumetric and functional brain MRI information, as well as disease markers, associated with thorough neurological and clinical assessment. Reasons for not acquiring MRI were mainly due to claustrophobia or scanner unavailability.ConclusionThis is an exceptional opportunity to have comparative large‐scale databases, with anatomical and functional brain imaging from different populations, allowing us to study real world diverse brain data and better understand its relationships with demographics, health and risk characteristics, and cognition.

AbstractBackgroundA key focus of the U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is recruitment of unimpaired older individuals at risk for cognitive decline with heterogeneous characteristics (under‐represented racial and ethnicity groups (URG), family history of cognitive decline, hypertension, geographic diversity), and a subset of individuals undergo PET and MRI.MethodTo examine effects of heterogeneity on relationships between risk factors, AD biomarkers (Aβ and entorhinal tau PET, hippocampal volume (HV)) and cognition (global, executive function, and memory) were examined from U.S. POINTER neuroimaging participants (N = 602, about 65% of the anticipated total sample) and a subset of Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative participants (N = 503). Neuroimaging data were processed and analyzed using harmonized methods across studies. Some cohort‐specific measurements were standardized using a within‐cohort reference group (Aβ‐negative individuals <70yrs and with global CDR = 0).ResultU.S. POINTER imaging participants are younger than those in ADNI (68.6+/‐5.0yrs vs 70.7+/‐4.4yrs), more likely to be female (65% vs 58%) and from URG (27% vs 15%), and had lower education (14.7+/‐3.3yrs vs 16.7+/‐2.3yrs) and higher Framingham Cardiovascular Risk scores (9.9+/‐8.3 vs 7.7+/‐5.3). The groups differed on several AD biomarkers and cognitive measures (Table). In regression models, AD biomarkers were stronger predictors of cognitive performance in ADNI compared to POINTER. Specifically, Aβ+ individuals with elevated tau had disproportionately poorer cognitive performance in ADNI, and this relationship remained consistent across cognitive measures (Figure). Conversely, demographic/risk variables were stronger predictors in POINTER. Demographic/risk predictors (age, sex, education, race, and FRS) together explained twice as much variance in global cognition in POINTER compared to ADNI (Adjusted R2 = 29% vs 14%). The addition of AD biomarkers to the model further increased the amount of variance in global cognition explained from 14% to 34% in ADNI, but addition of AD biomarkers did not increase variance explained in the POINTER model.ConclusionHeterogeneity among study participants appears to influence baseline biomarker‐cognition relationships such that AD biomarkers explain more variability in cognitive performance in ADNI than POINTER. These findings further suggest that cohort characteristics may affect the potential influence of amyloid‐ and tau‐modifying treatments on cognition.

AbstractBackgroundThe U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is a 2‐year randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of lifestyle interventions in cognitively unimpaired older adults (60‐79 years) at risk for decline/dementia. Here, using data from the POINTER Imaging ancillary substudy, we explore how Alzheimer’s disease pathology and cardiovascular risk influence brain structure, cognition and their relationship.MethodPOINTER Imaging participants underwent cross‐sectional MRI, [18F]Florbetaben (FBB) Aβ‐PET and [18F]MK6240 tau‐PET. FBB and MK6240 data were processed using previously validated methods. MRIs were processed with voxel‐based morphometry. To quantify cardiovascular risk, the Framingham risk score (FRS) was calculated for each participant. We used linear regression models in the whole sample as well as in Aβ status subgroups to evaluate voxel‐wise associations of brain structure, measured using voxel‐based morphometry, with age, FRS, AD pathology (cortical summary Aβ and entorhinal cortex (ERC) tau burden), and a global cognition composite score.ResultAcross all 624 participants (Table 1), cognition (age‐adjusted) was positively related to brain structure across temporal, frontal and medial parietal cortices (Fig. 1A). ERC tau‐PET was negatively associated with brain structure in bilateral medial temporal lobes (MTL) and, notably, in bilateral basal forebrain (Fig. 1B). FRS showed significant negative associations in superior temporal gyrus and occipital cortex (Fig. 1C), but tau‐PET associations remained similar when adjusting for FRS. In Aβ+ participants, cognition‐ and FRS‐structure relationships were weaker but tau‐PET‐structure associations were stronger and extended outside the MTL. In Aβ‐ participants, cognition‐ and FRS‐structure relationships were similar to those observed in the whole cohort and tau‐PET associations were no longer significant.ConclusionIn this heterogeneous cohort of older adults, tau was associated with brain structure in strikingly specific patterns that were related to Aβ but not to cardiovascular risk as measured by the FRS. Tau‐structure associations were restricted to temporal lobes and basal forebrain and were independent of more widespread cognition‐structure associations, indicating that factors other than tau may play a critical role. Our next steps include comparing the current cohort to others with different at‐risk characteristics (e.g., ADNI, Berkeley Aging Cohort Study).

AbstractBackgroundA key focus of the U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is recruitment of unimpaired older individuals at risk for cognitive decline with heterogeneous characteristics (under‐represented racial and ethnicity groups (URG), family history of cognitive decline, hypertension, geographic diversity), and a subset of individuals undergo PET and MRI.MethodTo examine effects of heterogeneity on relationships between risk factors, AD biomarkers (Aß and entorhinal tau PET, hippocampal volume (HV)) and cognition (global, executive function, and memory) were examined from U.S. POINTER neuroimaging participants (N = 602, about 65% of the anticipated total sample) and a subset of Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative participants (N = 503). Neuroimaging data were processed and analyzed using harmonized methods across studies. Some cohort‐specific measurements were standardized using a within‐cohort reference group (Aß‐negative individuals <70yrs and with global CDR = 0).ResultU.S. POINTER imaging participants are younger than those in ADNI (68.6+/‐5.0yrs vs 70.7+/‐4.4yrs), more likely to be female (65% vs 58%) and from URG (27% vs 15%), and had lower education (14.7+/‐3.3yrs vs 16.7+/‐2.3yrs) and higher Framingham Cardiovascular Risk scores (9.9+/‐8.3 vs 7.7+/‐5.3). The groups differed on several AD biomarkers and cognitive measures (Table). In regression models, AD biomarkers were stronger predictors of cognitive performance in ADNI compared to POINTER. Specifically, Aß+ individuals with elevated tau had disproportionately poorer cognitive performance in ADNI, and this relationship remained consistent across cognitive measures (Figure). Conversely, demographic/risk variables were stronger predictors in POINTER. Demographic/risk predictors (age, sex, education, race, and FRS) together explained twice as much variance in global cognition in POINTER compared to ADNI (Adjusted R2 = 29% vs 14%). The addition of AD biomarkers to the model further increased the amount of variance in global cognition explained from 14% to 34% in ADNI, but addition of AD biomarkers did not increase variance explained in the POINTER model.ConclusionHeterogeneity among study participants appears to influence baseline biomarker‐cognition relationships such that AD biomarkers explain more variability in cognitive performance in ADNI than POINTER. These findings further suggest that cohort characteristics may affect the potential influence of amyloid‐ and tau‐modifying treatments on cognition.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONDelay in diagnosis of posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) syndrome is common, and the lack of familiarity with assessment tools for identifying visual cortical dysfunction is a contributing factor. We propose recommendations for the approach to the evaluation of PCA clinical features during the office visit, the neuropsychological evaluation, and the research setting. A recommended screening battery for eye clinics is also proposed.METHODSRecommendations were developed using results from a web‐based survey of members of Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Atypical Alzheimer's Disease Professional Interest Area (PIA), literature review, and consensus by the PCA assessment working party of the Atypical Alzheimer's Disease PIA.RESULTSSurvey results revealed robust agreement for assessment tool preferences for PCA features, and many respondents indicated that they reserve assessment tools for use only when PCA is suspected. For some PCA features, curated tools were preferred over validated battery tools, particularly for the office visit. Consensus recommendations superseded survey preferences for two core cognitive features within the 2017 PCA diagnostic criteria.DISCUSSIONThese consensus recommendations provide an evaluation framework for PCA clinical features and can facilitate timely and accurate recognition and diagnosis of PCA. Broader use of these tools should be sought, and development and validation of novel PCA clinical outcome assessments are needed to improve our understanding of atypical AD and other dementias and support the inclusion of those with PCA in treatment trials.

AbstractBackgroundWe developed the Institute on Methods and Protocols for Advancement of Clinical Trials in ADRD (IMPACT‐AD) to address the shortage of qualified investigators with adequate training and expertise to conduct Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and AD Related Dementias (ADRD) clinical trials.MethodWe describe the experience of the first two years of funding of the IMPACT‐AD course, specifically the rates of applications to the course, descriptive summaries of the accepted trainees, and the measures of participant satisfaction and learning.ResultOver the first two years of the course, we received 195 eligible applications to the course. Most (n = 121, 62%) applicants were female and nearly half self‐reported as being African American/Black, Asian, or Pacific Islander race and/or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Forty‐one applicants (21%) indicated that they were the first in their family to attend collegeOf 69 total trainees accepted to the course (36% acceptance rate), a majority (n = 44, 64%) were female. Twenty‐eight (41%) self‐reported as being African American/Black, Asian, or Pacific Islander race and eleven (16%) were of Hispanic ethnicity. Fourteen trainees (20%) identified as being the first person in their family to attend college. Among trainees, 24 (35%) were MDs, 30 (43%) were PhDs, and 9 (13%) held master’s degrees.Course lecture topics were rated, on average, as “essential” or “valuable” by 98% of trainees. Across lecture topics, on average, 48% of trainees rated their prior knowledge of topics as “very strong” or “strong,” and 11% of trainees rated their prior knowledge as “weak.” Overall, 52% of trainees evaluated their change in knowledge based on the lectures as “very much increased,” 46% as “somewhat” or “slightly” increased, and 2% as “no change.” Results were similar for the two tracks. Based on pre‐ and post‐course assessments, trainees improved their knowledge of covered content (from 62% to 79% correct responses on knowledge assessments).ConclusionThe IMPACT‐AD course is achieving its mission of educating and diversifying the next generation of ADRD trialists.We thank Dr. Laurie Ryan and Dr. Kristina McLinden from the National Institute on Aging for their key contributions in leadership and scientific guidance of IMPACT‐AD.