Weigand, Stephen D.

Background and purposeMidbrain atrophy is a characteristic feature of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), although it is unclear whether it is associated with the PSP syndrome (PSPS) or PSP pathology. The aim of the present study was to determine whether midbrain atrophy is a useful biomarker of PSP pathology, or whether it is only associated with typical PSPS.MethodsAll autopsy‐confirmed subjects were identified with the PSP clinical phenotype (i.e. PSPS) or PSP pathology and a volumetric MRI. Of 24 subjects with PSP pathology, 11 had a clinical diagnosis of PSPS (PSP‐PSPS), and 13 had a non‐PSPS clinical diagnosis (PSP‐other). Three subjects had PSPS and corticobasal degeneration pathology (CBD‐PSPS). Healthy control and disease control groups (i.e. a group without PSPS or PSP pathology) and a group with CBD pathology and corticobasal syndrome (CBD‐CBS) were selected. The midbrain area was measured in all subjects. [Correction added on 21 June 2013, after first online publication: the abbreviation of corticobasal degeneration pathology was changed from CBD‐PSP to CBD‐PSPS.]ResultsThe midbrain area was reduced in each group with clinical PSPS (with and without PSP pathology). The group with PSP pathology and non‐PSPS clinical syndromes did not show reduced midbrain area. Midbrain area was smaller in the subjects with PSPS than in those without PSPS (P < 0.0001), with an area under the receiver operator curve of 0.99 (0.88, 0.99). A midbrain area cut‐point of 92 mm2 provided optimum sensitivity (93%) and specificity (89%) for differentiation.ConclusionMidbrain atrophy is associated with the clinical presentation of PSPS, but not with the pathological diagnosis of PSP in the absence of clinical PSPS. This finding has important implications for the utility of midbrain measurements as diagnostic biomarkers for PSP pathology.

Objective The newly proposed National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association (NIA‐AA) criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to Alzheimer disease (AD) suggest a combination of clinical features and biomarker measures, but their performance in the community is not known. Methods The Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA) is a population‐based longitudinal study of nondemented subjects in Olmsted County, Minnesota. A sample of 154 MCI subjects from the MCSA was compared to a sample of 58 amnestic MCI subjects from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 1 (ADNI‐1) to assess the applicability of the criteria in both settings and to assess their outcomes. Results Fourteen percent of MCSA and 16% of ADNI‐1 of subjects were biomarker negative. In addition, 14% of MCSA and 12% of ADNI‐1 subjects had evidence for amyloid deposition only, whereas 43% of MCSA and 55% of ADNI‐1 subjects had evidence for amyloid deposition plus neurodegeneration (magnetic resonance imaging atrophy, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography hypometabolism, or both). However, a considerable number of subjects had biomarkers inconsistent with the proposed AD model; for example, 29% of MCSA subjects and 17% of ADNI‐1 subjects had evidence for neurodegeneration without amyloid deposition. These subjects may not be on an AD pathway. Neurodegeneration appears to be a key factor in predicting progression relative to amyloid deposition alone. Interpretation The NIA‐AA criteria apply to most MCI subjects in both the community and clinical trials settings; however, a sizeable proportion of subjects had conflicting biomarkers, which may be very important and need to be explored. Ann Neurol 2013;74:199–208