Jagust, William J.

Abstract Hippocampal atrophy on magnetic resonance imaging is an important biomarker in Alzheimer's disease (AD). While hippocampal atrophy was thought to result from tau tangles in AD, different neuropathologies can lead to hippocampal atrophy, especially TAR DNA‐binding protein 43 (TDP‐43) pathology. In this narrative review, we evaluate existing studies on the relative contribution of tau and TDP‐43 pathology to medial temporal lobe (MTL) atrophy. We report a clear association of both tau and TDP‐43 neuropathology with MTL atrophy, even after correcting for other neuropathologies. Next, we discuss a potential synergism between tau and TDP‐43 and the relative timing of the effects of both neuropathologies. Finally, avenues for future research will be discussed. A better understanding of the interplay between tau and TDP‐43 neuropathologies and their effect on atrophy will help with the development of more specific biomarkers for limbic‐predominant age‐related TDP‐43 encephalopathy and pinpointing of the optimal timing for testing anti‐tau and anti‐TDP‐43 treatments in trials. Highlights Both tau and TAR DNA‐binding protein 43 (TDP‐43) pathology contribute to medial temporal lobe atrophy. There is a positive association between tau and TDP‐43 and potentially a synergism. It is unclear if tau and TDP‐43 have an additive or synergistic effect on atrophy. The relative timing of the tau and TDP‐43 effects on atrophy remains unclear. Clarifying the interplay between tau and TDP‐43 will help improve magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers.

AbstractBackgroundTau‐PET tracers have been used to diagnose and stage Alzheimer’s disease. However, different tau tracers present distinct patterns of binding throughout the brain, challenging the harmonization of their results. We hypothesize that the choice of a reference region can impact the harmonization of the tau‐PET standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR). In this context, we aimed to explore how different cerebellar reference regions impact the association between [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK‐6240 SUVR values.MethodWe studied 185 individuals across the aging and AD spectrum with head‐to‐head Flortaucipir and MK‐6240 tau PET (HEAD Study). SUVRs were processed to a common 8mm FWHM using 15 different reference regions defined in the spatially unbiased atlas template of the cerebellum (SUIT) (Diedrichsen, 2009). Regression models investigated the association between Flortaucipir and MK‐6240 using multiple combinations of reference regions. R2 statistic was used to estimate goodness‐of‐fitting.Result225 combinations of associations Flortaucipir and MK‐6240 SUVR were tested, where the SUVRs are not necessarily quantified using the same reference region. Figure 1 presents the top 25 strongest and 25 weakest associations, ordered based on the coefficient of determination (R²). Flortaucipir and MK‐6240 exhibited the most robust associations when the inferior cerebellar gray matter or Crus I were employed for SUVR determination (R2=0.89, Figure 1‐2). Conversely, combinations incorporating the fastigial region consistently yielded weaker associations between the two tracers (R2<0.70, Figure 1‐2).ConclusionInterestingly, we showed that the inferior cerebellum, when used for both tracers, serves as a robust reference region for determining the most similar SUVRs for Flortaucipir and MK‐6240. Notably, these two regions have been commonly utilized in previous studies involving these tau tracers. Our results imply that the inferior cerebellum could be the optimal reference region for research aimed at harmonizing tau PET tracers using statistical scales.

AbstractBackgroundStandardizing tau pathology quantification in vivo is challenged by differences in binding characteristics between tau‐PET tracers. The HEAD study aims to generate a leading, longitudinal head‐to‐head dataset of MK‐6240, Flortaucipir, RO948, and PI‐2620 tau‐PET to harmonize these tracers' outcomes and develop tools allowing for the generalization of findings across large studies and trials. Here, we present current advancements in building the HEAD study cohort and dataset.MethodsThe HEAD study is managed at the University of Pittsburgh. HEAD comprises several sites across the US and Canada in which 620 subjects (young, cognitively unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease (AD)) will undergo tau‐PET with at least two tracers, amyloid‐PET with PiB or NAV4694, MRI, blood collection, and standardized neuropsychological testing at baseline and at 18‐month follow‐up. PET and MRI acquisition parameters are based on ADNI4 protocols and neuropsychological testing employs the NACC Uniform Data Set. The National Centralized Repository for AD serves as the biorepository for blood samples and the Laboratory of Neuroimaging provides a centralized database for imaging and neuropsychological archiving. PET data is reconstructed to maximize cross‐scanner harmonization and is processed uniformly similarly to ADNI4 PET.ResultsIn one year of active enrollment (Jan 2023‐Jan 2024), 362 participants were enrolled at six active sites; over 80% of participants completed neuropsychological testing and MRI, and over 70% completed Flortaucipir, MK‐6240, and amyloid‐PET, with a mean tau‐PET acquisition window of 29.1 days. RO948 and PI‐2620 tau‐PET are additionally acquired in a subset currently including 41 participants (Figure 1). Current HEAD cohort demographics including age, sex, underrepresented populations, and group distributions, APOEε4 carrier status, and amyloid positivity are shown in Figure 2. A case of a subject with AD with all 4 tau‐PET tracers acquired head‐to‐head within 49 days is shown in Figure 3.ConclusionThe HEAD study represents a continued effort in the optimization of AD imaging biomarkers. Baseline data collection is projected to be completed in 2024; results being generated by multiple groups from this dataset will provide novel and crucial guidance on the use of tau‐PET tracers in research, clinical trials, and prospectively in clinical practice.

AbstractBackgroundThe HEAD study focuses on collecting an extensive dataset from various tau‐PET tracers, aiming to establish robust anchor values, which are essential for harmonizing tau‐PET measurements. Here, we aim to showcase the capability of converting 3D tau‐PET images into a common scale using the Universal Tau‐PET Scale, Uniτ (tau), and to use these 3D images to subsequently obtain ROIs as needed.MethodsWe assessed 185 individuals across the aging and AD spectrum from the HEAD study, with [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK‐6240 tau‐PET tracers. Tau‐PET SUVR images were standardized to a common 8mm FWHM, using the inferior cerebellar gray matter as the reference region. We generated Uniτ Tau‐PET 3D images using a single formula based on Meta‐temporal parameters in two steps: first, within‐tracer anchoring based on young (<25 years) and cognitively impaired individuals; second, between‐tracer anchoring using a piecewise transformation from [18F]Flortaucipir to [18F]MK‐6240, with smoothing at the piecewise inflection point. Subsequently, we extracted mean Uniτ values from these 3D images for key ROIs, including meta‐temporal, mesial, temporo‐parietal, frontal, and Braak stages III‐VI. Finally, we correlated Uniτ values across ROIs between the two tracers to evaluate the accuracy of estimates from the voxel‐wise transformation.ResultsThe original SUVR images present large differences between the two tau‐PET tracers (Figure 1). However, upon applying the Uniτ piecewise transformation with smoothing to all brain voxels, we were able to reasonably harmonize these images to the Uniτ scale, substantially reducing visual variability. Notably, the mean Uniτ values for the ROIs extracted from these harmonized 3D tau‐PET brain images demonstrated a high level of association between the two tracers (Figure 2). Furthermore, estimates generated from ROIs or extracted from our 3D parametric Uniτ model yielded identical estimates (Figure 3).ConclusionThe strong associations between tracers after directly harmonizing 3D images to Uniτ scale using the piecewise transformation with smoothing, underscore the effectiveness of the proposed method. This approach provides a reliable and standardized way to compare tau‐PET data across different tracers. Our results indicate the feasibility of harmonizing 3D tau‐PET images without relying on pre‐established ROIs, overcoming the limitation of restricting the analysis to only few brain regions.

AbstractBackgroundTau PET provides continuous measurements of tau tangle pathology in the human brain. However, establishing cutoffs is crucial for selecting individuals for treatment in clinical trials or practice. In the absence of postmortem data, PET cutoffs must be established using statistical methods based on what is considered normal tracer uptake. In this study, we tested the impact of various methods to determine tau positivity using two different tau PET tracers in individuals scanned head‐to‐head.MethodsWe studied 147 individuals from Head‐to‐Head Harmonization of Tau Tracers in Alzheimer's Disease (HEAD) study with tau tangle PET scans with [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK‐6240, and amyloid‐β (Aβ) PET. Tau deposition was measured with the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) of each agent in the Medial Temporal Lobe (MTL) and the Entorhinal Cortex (EC). To determine Tau positivity three different methods were used: >2.5 standard deviations (SD) than the mean of the young, >1.5 SD mean of the cognitively unimpaired (CU) and >1.5 SD mean of CUAβ‐.ResultsDemographic characteristics of the study population are reported in Table 1. Using the cutoff >2.5 SD mean of young, [18F]Flortaucipir was positive in 35 (23.8%) and 69 (46.9%) individuals in the EC and MTL, respectively. [18F]MK‐6240 was positive in 49 (33.3%) and 58 (39.5%) individuals in EC and in MTL. Using >1.5 SD mean of CUAβ‐, [18F]Flortaucipir was positive in 38 (25.9%) and 45 (30.6%) individuals in EC and MTL, while [18F]MK‐6240 was positive in 51 (34.7%) and 50 (34.0%) in EC and in MTL (Figure 1).ConclusionsOur findings indicate variations in tau positivity when employing different methods based on either the young or CUAβ‐. [18F]Flortaucipir exhibited a higher rate of positive results when the method based on young individuals was applied in the MTL. Conversely, [18F]MK‐6240 showed more consistent and generally higher positivity when other methods were used for cutoff determination and/or in the EC region. Further research with a larger sample size is required to gain a better understanding of the optimal cutoff determination methods for these tracers.

AbstractBackgroundUtilizing PET amyloid‐beta (Aβ) and tau for staging Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) has demonstrated potential in identifying individuals with varying degrees of disease severity, applicable to both clinical trials and practice. However, the diverse binding characteristics of tau tracers pose challenges to the application of this staging across different ligands. In this study, we evaluate a novel staging framework proposed by the AA working group, employing Aβ PET and either [18F]MK6240 or [18F]Flortaucipir in individuals participating in a head‐to‐head study of tau PET tracers. This will provide insights into the robustness of this framework when applied across different tau ligands.MethodWe evaluated 154 people (89 CU and 65 CI), with MK6240, Flortaucipir, Aβ‐PET, MRI. SUVRs used inferior cerebellar gray as reference. Participants were categorized in Aβ positivity(A), using visual read, and tau positivity (T) in medial temporal lobe(MTL) and neocortex(NEO). Tau MTL(TMTL) and NEO positivity were defined as average +3 SD of youngs. NEO moderate(TMOD) and high(THIGH) was defined as below and above median SUVR of NEO‐positive individuals. Individuals were grouped as: A‐T‐, A+T‐, A+TMTL+(early), A+TMOD+(intermediary), and A+THIGH+(advanced).ResultsWe found that the distribution of the number of individuals across the five AD stages was comparable when using both MK6240 and Flortaucipir tracers (Figure 1). However, upon examining the concordance within each group, we found a low concordance of 30% (3/10) between tracers in the early tau stage (A+TMTL+). Concordance increased in the intermediary stage A+TMOD+, with a rate of 65% (9/14), and further increased to 79% (11/14) in the advanced stage (A+THIGH+). The A+T‐ group exhibited the highest concordance between tracer results, at 95% (21/22).ConclusionOur findings indicate that the application of this framework across different populations using different tau tracers can lead to a compatible distribution among groups. However, in a direct comparison, we noted that this did not necessarily result in high concordance between groups, as group shifts were observed that depended on the cutoffs used (data not shown). These results emphasize the necessity for harmonization of tau PET tracers prior to their utilization for stage determination.

AbstractBackgroundIdentifying individuals’ levels of tau PET pathology could prove to be beneficial in clinical settings, given that emerging therapies aimed reducing Aβ seem to be most effective in these individuals. Here, we present the cases of four patients who visited the memory clinic at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between June and December 2023 and underwent both Aβ and tau‐PET scans.MethodThese individuals had standard clinical and cognitive outcomes, typical blood tests order in patients with memory impairment, MRI, and, as part of the HEAD study, PET PIB Aβ and two tau PET tracers (MK6240 and Flortaucipir).ResultAll patients presented a primary complaint of progressive memory decline. The results of their blood count, metabolic panel, TSH, and vitamin B12 tests were unremarkable. Patient 1 had a normal MRI, while Patients 2‐4 exhibited mild ischemic changes (Table 1). All patients tested positive for amyloid PET, supporting the diagnosis of AD. However, their tau PET results varied. Patients 1 (MOCA = 6) and 3 (MOCA =19), who were demented with impaired Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL), tested positive for tau PET with Braak stages V‐VI using both tau PET tracers. Conversely, the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) Patients 2 (MOCA = 19) and 5 (MOCA = 29, neuropsych evaluation indicating MCI), who exhibited low tau levels, tested positive for MK6240 but negative for FTP.ConclusionAll four patients exhibited symptoms and signs consistent with typical amnestic AD presentation, which were confirmed using Aβ PET. Aβ PET presented a similar pattern across all individuals (Figure 1). Tau PET demonstrated greater variability, with lower levels in less cognitively impaired patients. Although tau PET can potentially be useful in identifying individuals in the earliest stages that would benefit from Aβ‐lowering therapies, this small series did not exclude that a low MOCA score combined with Aβ PET could achieve a similar outcome. Larger samples in real‐world clinical contexts are necessary to identify individuals with discrepancies between tau PET uptake and cognitive tests. This would reinforce the need for tau PET markers as complementary tests, singularly capable of identifying individuals across various biological stages to indicate therapies in clinical practice.

AbstractBackgroundTau PET tracers are employed to measure the accumulation of tau in vivo in the brain. Each tau tracer possesses unique characteristics, including binding affinity, sensitivity, and specificity to tau aggregates. This study leverages the HEAD study dataset, which is currently performing baseline tau PET tracers and conducting multiple clinical and cognitive assessments. The objective of this study is to elucidate the relationship between tau PET tracers [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK6240 and commonly used tests of general cognitive performance.MethodsWe assessed 170 individuals (107 cognitively unimpaired, and 63 cognitively impaired) with available PET [18F]Flortaucipir [18F]MK6240 and cognitive assessments (MoCA, MMSE, and CDR‐SB). We calculated tau PET SUVR for [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK6240 using the inferior cerebellar grey matter as a reference. Pearson correlations were performed between SUVR values for each Braak region and MoCA, MMSE, and CDR‐SB. In addition, linear regression models accounting for age, sex, years of education, HEAD site, and diagnosis were used to estimate the relationships. The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) was utilized to evaluate the models, with smaller AIC values signifying better performance.ResultsPerson correlation coefficients (r), which were calculated without considering any covariates, demonstrated higher numerical values between [18F]MK6240 and the scores of MoCA, MMSE, and CDR‐SB across the Braak regions (Figure 1). Similarly, when we performed linear regressions that accounted for relevant covariates, we found that the [18F]MK6240 SUVR in Braak 1 and Braak 4 regions exhibited a stronger association with cognitive tests than in other Braak regions or any region with [18F]Flortaucipir SUVR (Figure 2).ConclusionsBoth [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK6240 SUVR demonstrated a robust association with tests of general cognitive performance commonly used in AD research and clinical practice. Generally, Braak regions 1 and 4 exhibited a stronger association with general cognitive performance using all tests, whereas Braak regions 5‐6 showed the weakest association.

Abstract Background The HEAD study aims to collect a large dataset of multiple tau‐PET tracers to provide robust anchor values for tau‐PET harmonization. Here, we tested the hypothesis that anchoring two tau tracer uptake values using head‐to‐head measurements has the potential to generate an accurate universal tau‐PET scale, named Uniτ(tau). Methods We assessed 200 individuals across the aging and AD spectrum (Training: HEAD data freeze 2.0, n=185; Testing: UPitt dataset (Gogola et al.), n=15) with [ 18 F]Flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240 tau‐PET. SUVRs were processed to a common 8mm FWHM, with inferior cerebellar gray matter as the reference region (Pascoal et al.). Uniτ explored two anchoring/harmonization methods. First, we examined within‐tracer anchoring by creating anchor values based on the mean SUVR of Youngs (<25 years) and 95th percentile voxels from cognitively impaired individuals. Second, we explored within‐ plus between‐tracer anchoring, employing linear (e.g., piecewise) and non‐linear regressions. To address the inherent problem of discontinuity of piecewise transformations, we implemented two smoothing methods at the inflection point between equations, transforming them into a continuous function. Results Uniτ scale anchoring within‐tracer resulted in similar estimates for high values, but less accurate in the lower range (Figure 1,2). Anchoring within‐ plus between‐tracer improved estimate consistency, with the piecewise transformation generating the best results. The piecewise smoothing equation yielded estimates comparable to those obtained from the piecewise method without smoothing. This allowed for the use of a single formula. In addition, this leads to more robust results when the goal is to study longitudinal changes in the scale (data not shown). UPitt testing dataset showed similar results to the training set (Figure 3). Conclusion Our preliminary findings suggest that anchoring tau‐PET values both within and between tracers has the potential to harmonize tau‐PET tracers, while preserving their characteristics. Currently, piecewise smoothing is the preferred method for Uniτ, but we are continuously fine‐tuning scale parameters as we acquire more data. The final scale parameters will be determined based on extensive training and testing data from multiple tracers. This cautious methodology holds the promise of delivering reliable, robust, and reproducible results, ensuring safe usage of the scale in clinical trials, and potentially paving the way for future use in clinical practice.