Toga, Arthur W.

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.

AbstractBackgroundWe examined neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) and psychotropic medication use at the midway point of data collection of the Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer’s Disease Study (LEADS). We compared amyloid‐positive early‐onset Alzheimer’s disease (EOAD) participants and amyloid‐negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer’s disease [EOnonAD]) participants across NPS domains and psychotropic medication categories.Method282 participants enrolled in LEADS were compared across diagnostic groups – amyloid‐positive EOAD (n = 212) and amyloid‐negative EOnonAD (n = 70). All participants were between ages 40 and 64 at baseline. NPS were measured with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory – Questionnaire (NPI‐Q) and Geriatric Depression Scale – Short Form (GDS‐SF). Medications were categorized into psychotropic category (e.g., antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines). Groups were compared on NPI‐Q using binary logistic regression adjusting for sex and disease severity, on GDS‐SF using linear regression adjusting for sex and disease severity, and on psychotropic medication use using Chi square or Fisher’s exact test.ResultDemographic data are presented in Table 1. Average total NPI‐Q score was higher in EOnonAD than EOAD (p = .002, ŋp 2 = .03). Regardless of diagnostic group, informants endorsed Affective behaviors most frequently (76.2%). EOAD informants endorsed fewer Distress‐Tension behaviors (p = .02, OR = .498) and Impulse Control behaviors (p = .01, OR = .438). EOAD informants also endorsed apathy (p < .001, OR = .316), irritability (p = .02, OR = .498), and disinhibition (p = .04, OR = .476) at lower frequency than EOnonAD. GDS‐SF showed that the EOnonAD participants self‐reported more symptoms of depression than the EOAD group (p = .002, ŋp 2 = .03). (Table 2A). A minority of participants, regardless of diagnostic group, reported psychotropic medication use (35%). There was higher use in EOnonAD (38%) than EOAD (24%) (p = .03, Cohen W = .14) (Table 2B).ConclusionNPS burden and psychotropic medication use were higher in EOnonAD than EOAD participants, despite EOnonAD being less severely impaired. LEADS continues to collect data. Future studies will examine etiologies that may be larger drivers of NPS than AD neuropathology, mediators (e.g., race, ethnicity) in the association between NPS and diagnostic group classication, compare NPS in EOAD vs. LOAD, and examine longitudinal changes in neuropsychiatric profiles.

AbstractBackgroundApproximately 10‐25% of amnestic early‐onset dementia are negative for amyloid (Early‐onset non‐Alzheimer’s Disease, EOnonAD). EOnonAD is a heterogenous group with various etiologies. In order to better understand the traits of EOnonAD, we clustered amnestic EOnonAD individuals according to cognitive patterns.MethodCognitive data of 62 EOnonAD individuals from the Longitudinal Early‐onset AD study (LEADS) were Z‐normalized to 91 intact individuals after adjusting for age, sex, and education. This led to domain‐averaged composite Z‐scores for memory, language, speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function. Cluster analysis using the Ward method on the residuals for the five composites was performed. We used Scree plot using the pseudo T‐squared to determine the optimal number of clusters. We compared demographics, imaging biomarkers (amyloid and tau PET SUVR, hippocampal volume), plasma (pTau231, Aß40, Aß42, glial fibrillary acidic protein, and neurofilament light chain (NfL)), and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (Aß42/40, NfL, Neurogranin, Visinin‐like protein, YKL‐40, and Synaptosome Associated Protein 25) across the clusters after adjusting for age, sex, and education. We compared gray matter density of each EOnonAD cluster to controls (n = 84) using voxel‐wise multiple linear regressions in SPM12, adjusting for age, sex, education, and intracranial volume.ResultScree plot using the pseudo‐T‐squared suggested three clusters. Cluster 1 (38/62, 61.3%) was characterized by having the mildest cognitive impairment in all domains. Cluster 2 (19/62, 30.6%) was characterized by more severe memory and language impairment. Cluster 3 (5/62, 8.1%) was characterized by more severe impairment in speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function (Table 1). Cluster 3 showed significantly higher NfL for both plasma (Cluster 1 vs 3, p<0.001; Cluster 2 vs 3, p < 0.004) and CSF (Cluster 1 vs 3, p = 0.001). Other biomarkers did not show significant difference (Table 1). Only Cluster 3 showed significant atrophy in the bilateral fronto‐parietal areas at p<0.01, uncorrected (Figure 1).ConclusionWe identified heterogeneity in cognitive patterns among amnestic EOnonAD individuals. Cluster 1 had mildest cognitive impairment; Cluster 2 had predominant impairment in memory and language; and Cluster 3 had predominant impairment in speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function, with significant fronto‐parietal atrophy and high NfL indicating active neurodegeneration.

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 Standardized Centralized Alzheimer’s & related dementias Neuroimaging (SCAN) project harmonizes processing of prospectively acquired PET and MRI scans from Alzheimer’s disease research centers (ADRCs) across the USA. SCAN data will be integrated with other ADRC data streams within the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC), including the Uniform Data Set which includes rich longitudinal demographic, cognitive, and neuropathological data, resulting in a large, potentially representative cohort. The project has sought to accommodate site‐to‐site variation in image acquisition while permitting harmonization of imaging data, necessitating new analytic approaches for different PET tracers and PET scans without MRIs.MethodPET scans underwent preprocessing for quality control and smoothing to a uniform resolution. MRI‐free processing pipelines and positivity thresholds were developed for each beta‐amyloid (Aβ)‐PET tracer: [11C]PiB, [18F]florbetaben (FBB), [18F]florbetapir (FBP) and [18F]flutafuranol (NAV). A generic Aβ‐PET template was used for spatial normalization and cortical summary SUVRs were calculated in template space. Aβ‐positivity thresholds were determined by examining both MRI‐dependent thresholds transformed into MRI‐free units and a young control mean+2SD. Centiloid (CL) conversions were completed for each Aβ‐PET tracer. Tau‐PET tracers ([18F]flortaucipir (FTP) and [18F]MK‐6240) required tracer‐specific warping templates for best performance relative to gold‐standard MRI‐dependent processing. Demographic and clinical data were obtained from NACC.Result15 ADRCs have contributed data to SCAN as of January 2023. 477 participants had preprocessed, SCAN‐compliant (https://scan.naccdata.org/) Aβ‐PET scans and NACC data; 219 of these participants (46%) also had tau‐PET scans (Table 1). This cohort included 18% of individuals from underrepresented groups. Clinical diagnostic groups ranged from cognitively unimpaired to MCI and dementia (74% of whom had AD dementia). Using pooled Aβ‐PET data across 4 tracers in CLs, there were expected differences in Aβ burden by diagnosis group (Fig. 1) and positive associations with tau (Fig. 2).ConclusionSCAN has successfully harmonized PET data from more than a dozen US ADRCs yielding a large, clinically heterogeneous cohort of deeply phenotyped research participants. SCAN data will be compatible with ADNI data allowing for further pooling of data and greater statistical power to drive critical questions in AD and related dementias research.

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.

AbstractBackgroundThe Standardized Centralized Alzheimer’s & related dementias Neuroimaging (SCAN) project harmonizes processing of prospectively acquired PET and MRI scans from Alzheimer’s disease research centers (ADRCs) across the USA. SCAN data will be integrated with other ADRC data streams within the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC), including the Uniform Data Set which includes rich longitudinal demographic, cognitive, and neuropathological data, resulting in a large, potentially representative cohort. The project has sought to accommodate site‐to‐site variation in image acquisition while permitting harmonization of imaging data, necessitating new analytic approaches for different PET tracers and PET scans without MRIs.MethodPET scans underwent preprocessing for quality control and smoothing to a uniform resolution. MRI‐free processing pipelines and positivity thresholds were developed for each beta‐amyloid (Aß)‐PET tracer: [11C]PiB, [18F]florbetaben (FBB), [18F]florbetapir (FBP) and [18F]flutafuranol (NAV). A generic Aß‐PET template was used for spatial normalization and cortical summary SUVRs were calculated in template space. Aß‐positivity thresholds were determined by examining both MRI‐dependent thresholds transformed into MRI‐free units and a young control mean+2SD. Centiloid (CL) conversions were completed for each Aß‐PET tracer. Tau‐PET tracers ([18F]flortaucipir (FTP) and [18F]MK‐6240) required tracer‐specific warping templates for best performance relative to gold‐standard MRI‐dependent processing. Demographic and clinical data were obtained from NACC.Result15 ADRCs have contributed data to SCAN as of January 2023. 477 participants had preprocessed, SCAN‐compliant (https://scan.naccdata.org/) Aß‐PET scans and NACC data; 219 of these participants (46%) also had tau‐PET scans (Table 1). This cohort included 18% of individuals from underrepresented groups. Clinical diagnostic groups ranged from cognitively unimpaired to MCI and dementia (74% of whom had AD dementia). Using pooled Aß‐PET data across 4 tracers in CLs, there were expected differences in Aß burden by diagnosis group (Fig. 1) and positive associations with tau (Fig. 2).ConclusionSCAN has successfully harmonized PET data from more than a dozen US ADRCs yielding a large, clinically heterogeneous cohort of deeply phenotyped research participants. SCAN data will be compatible with ADNI data allowing for further pooling of data and greater statistical power to drive critical questions in AD and related dementias research.