Knopman, David S.

AbstractBackgroundAutosomal dominant progranulin (GRN) mutations are a common genetic cause of frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Though clinical trials for GRN‐related therapies are underway, there is an unmet need for biomarkers that can predict symptom onset and track disease progression. We previously showed that presymptomatic GRN carriers exhibit thalamocortical hyperconnectivity that increases with age when they are presumably closer to symptom onset. However, whether hyperconnectivity arises concomitantly with markers of neurodegeneration remains unclear.MethodUtilizing T1 and task‐free functional magnetic resonance imaging (tf‐fMRI) from 49 presymptomatic and 26 symptomatic GRN mutation carriers, we determined the relationships between functional connectivity as measured by voxel‐wise whole brain degree and GRN‐relevant markers of disease progression, which included plasma neurofilament light chain (NfL) concentrations, CSF complement C1q and C3b protein levels, grey matter atrophy, and OCD symptom severity.ResultNfL concentrations were associated with frontotemporoparietal and thalamic hyperconnectivity in presymptomatic GRN carriers and extensive regions of atrophy in symptomatic carriers. Complement levels were associated with regions of hyperconnectivity, but not gray matter, in symptomatic carriers. Presymptomatic carriers with thalamic hyperconnectivity tended to have lower grey matter volume in bilateral insula and left lateral parietal cortex, which are among regions that deteriorate in GRN‐FTD. OCD symptom severity was associated with hypoconnectivity across all GRN carriers.ConclusionIn presymptomatic carriers, the co‐occurrence of hyperconnectivity, high NfL, and low gray matter suggests that tf‐fMRI hyperconnectivity may portend the onset of the neurodegenerative phase. These findings point toward hyperconnectivity as an indicator of approaching symptomatic onset.

AbstractBackgroundPrevious studies have linked impaired odor identification and global cognition with increased risk of cognitive decline and transition to dementia. However, the reverse question remains: if individuals have intact performance on these measures, are they at reduced risk for transition? We aimed to examine the accuracy of intact odor identification and global cognition for identifying lack of transition to dementia/cognitive decline using the population‐based Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and compare their accuracy against and in combination with amyloid PET (Positron Emission Tomography).Methodn = 647 participants age≥55 without dementia completed at baseline the Brief Smell Identification Test (BSIT; ‘Intact’ = 9‐12), Blessed Information‐Memory‐Concentration Test (BIMCT; ‘Intact’ = 18‐20,), and amyloid PET (‘Normal/Intact’ SUVR<1.48). We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for these measures, with “lack of transition to dementia” as the gold standard/target. “Lack of cognitive decline” (cognitively unimpaired to mild cognitive impairment [MCI]; cognitively unimpaired to dementia; or MCI to dementia) was a secondary target.Result94.7% of participants (613/647) did not transition to dementia and 84.2% (545/647) did not cognitively decline over 11.25‐year‐follow‐up. The combination of intact BSIT+BIMCT had high rates of lack of transition to dementia (98.3%, 355/361) and lack of cognitive decline (93.1%, 336/361). This combination yielded mixed sensitivity (0.579) and specificity (0.824) though had high positive predictive value (0.983) for identifying lack of transition to dementia. Intact amyloid PET alone exhibited comparable rates of lack of transition to dementia (99.0%, 418/423) and lack of cognitive decline (92.4%, 391/423). When evaluated conjointly, the combination of all three intact measures also had mixed sensitivity (0.421) and specificity (0.962) though higher positive predictive value (PPV = 0.996) for lack of transition to dementia. 99.6% (258/259) of participants with intact/normal status on all three did not transition to dementia and 96.5% (250/259) did not cognitively decline.ConclusionThis replicates prior reports that intact olfaction/global cognition have strong utility for identifying individuals unlikely to develop MCI/dementia. Intact/normal amyloid PET further enhances the positive predictive value. Clinically, identifying individuals at low risk of transition can shorten diagnostic workups, reduce need for early follow‐up visits, and screen patients in‐or‐out of clinical trials.

AbstractBackgroundPrior longitudinal studies among older adults have documented associations between hearing loss and changes in brain morphology. Whether interventions involving hearing aids can reduce age‐related atrophy is unknown. A substudy within the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders (ACHIEVE, Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03243422) randomized controlled trial tested the effect of a best‐practices hearing intervention versus health education control on three‐year change in cortical thickness among older adults with hearing loss.MethodThe ACHIEVE study enrolled 977 community‐dwelling adults aged 70‐84 years at baseline (2018‐2019) with untreated hearing loss (better ear pure tone average [0.5‐4 kHz] ≥30 and <70 dB HL) and without substantial cognitive impairment from four sites across the U.S. (Jackson, MS, Forsyth County, NC, Minneapolis, MN, Washington County, MD). Participants were randomized to a hearing intervention (provision of hearing aids and related technologies, counseling, and education) or a health education control (individual sessions with a health educator covering topics relevant to chronic disease and disability prevention). Three‐dimensional magnetic resonance imaging was performed on 3 Tesla Siemens scanners in a subsample of 445 participants at the ACHIEVE baseline and three‐year follow‐up. Linear mixed effects models were used in intention‐to‐treat analyses to estimate three‐year change in cortical thickness. All models adjusted for baseline measures of hearing loss, recruitment source, site, age, sex, and education. Missing outcome and covariate data was imputed to mitigate bias caused by informative attrition.ResultAt baseline, 224 participants were women (50.3%), 52 participants were Black (11.7%), and the mean (SD) age was 76.4 (4.0) years old (Table 1). Compared to the health education control, the hearing intervention exhibited a nominally protective effect on three‐year change in average cortical thickness (Figure 1). The greatest effect size for cortical thickness was observed in the occipital lobe, while the smallest effect size was detected in the temporal lobe. Statistically significant effects were detected in the pars orbitalis, rostral anterior cingulate, posterior cingulate, and isthmus cingulate (Figure 2).ConclusionHearing aid use may reduce decline in cortical thickness among older adults. The effects of hearing aids may be greatest in regions other than those associated with the auditory cortex.

AbstractBackgroundFew normative data for computerized measures administered in unsupervised remote environments are available. We aimed to determine what variables to include in normative models for remote self‐administered assessments, develop normative data for measures administered through Mayo Test Drive (MTD, a multi‐device remote cognitive assessment platform) and evaluate application of norms.Method1240 adults ages 33‐100 (96% White) from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and Mayo Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center met normative sample inclusion criteria that included a concordant Cognitively Unimpaired (CU) diagnosis (3 independent raters all diagnosed CU) and CDR = 0 (see Table 1 for sample characteristics). Raw test scores were converted to normalized scaled scores. We derived regression‐based normative data that adjusted for age, age2, sex and education (base model); alternative models are also provided (age+age2+sex; age+ age2). We evaluated whether additional model terms beyond the base model were needed using an a priori cut‐off of 1% variance improvement in adjusted R2 over and above the base model. We examined rates of low test performance defined as performance below ‐1 SD in independent validation samples (n = 167 concordant CU, n = 64 mild cognitive impairment (MCI), n = 14 dementia). Rates are considered significantly different than expected when 95% confidence intervals (CIs) do not include the expected 14.7% base rate frequency.ResultNo additional potential model terms met our a priori cut‐off for inclusion beyond the base model (see Table 2), including other quadratic and cubic terms or interactions, device type, response input type, potential session interference, and national area deprivation index (ADI available in subset; N = 776). Application of norms showed expected rates of low test performance among CU participants (95% CI includes expected base rate) and significantly greater than expected rates of low test performance for all variables in MCI (e.g., 62.5% for composite) and dementia (e.g., 71.4% for composite; see Table 3).ConclusionTypical normative models appear appropriate for remote self‐administered measures and are sensitive to cognitive impairment. Device type and response input did not explain enough variance to warrant inclusion in normative models but are important for individual level interpretation. Future work will improve representation of individuals from under‐represented groups.

AbstractBackgroundLimbic‐predominant age‐related TDP‐43 encephalopathy (LATE) is a neuropathologically‐defined disease, and it is frequently comorbid with Alzheimer’s disease neuropathological change (ADNC). However, the neurological syndrome associated with LATE neuropathological change (LATE‐NC) is not defined. We propose a set of clinical criteria for a limbic‐predominant amnestic neurodegenerative syndrome (LANS) that is highly associated with LATE‐NC. These criteria assess degree of certainty (highest, high, moderate, low) based on features that are measurable in vivo, including older age at evaluation, a mild clinical syndrome, impaired semantic knowledge, disproportionate hippocampal atrophy, limbic hypometabolism, absence of neocortical degeneration patterns and low likelihood of neocortical tau. We operationalized these criteria using two large datasets with clinical and pathologic outcomes.MethodWe screened autopsied patients from Mayo Clinic and ADNI cohorts and applied the LANS criteria to those with an antemortem predominant amnestic syndrome (Mayo, n = 165; ADNI, n = 53). We compared frequencies of neuropathological diagnoses across LANS likelihoods, compared longitudinal CDR‐SB trajectories across LANS likelihoods, and stratified ADNC/LATE‐NC patients according to their LANS likelihood and compared their longitudinal CDR‐SB trajectories to those with ADNC or LATE‐NC.ResultADNC, ADNC/LATE‐NC and LATE‐NC accounted for 35%, 37% and 4% of cases in the Mayo cohort, respectively, and 30%, 22%, and 9% of cases in the ADNI cohort, respectively (Fig. 1). ADNC cases had the lowest LANS likelihoods, LATE‐NC patients had the highest likelihoods, and ADNC/LATE‐NC patients had intermediate likelihoods. Patients with high LANS likelihoods had a milder and slower clinical course and more severe temporo‐limbic degeneration compared to those with low likelihoods (Fig. 2). ADNC/LATE‐NC patients with higher likelihoods had more temporo‐limbic degeneration and a slower rate of cognitive decline, and those with lower likelihoods had more lateral temporo‐parietal degeneration and a faster rate of cognitive decline (Fig. 3).ConclusionThe implementation of LANS criteria has implications for disambiguating the different driving etiologies of progressive amnestic presentations in older age to guide prognosis, treatment, and clinical trial design and enrollment. The development of in vivo biomarkers specific to TDP‐43 pathology are needed to further refine molecular associations between LANS and LATE‐NC and precise antemortem diagnoses of LATE.

Abstract With the advent of anti‐amyloid monoclonal antibody (AAMA) therapy, precision diagnosis is necessary for identifying appropriate patients with cognitive disorders due to Alzheimer's disease. Therapy with AAMAs requires that candidates be diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia, have elevated brain amyloid‐β, have good physical, psychiatric, and medical health, and lack clinical or biomarker evidence of potentially impactful non‐Alzheimer brain disorders. The first three diagnostic activities are the core of the Clinical Practice Guidelines, but the last element of the precision diagnosis requires new decision‐making tools for recognizing multi‐etiology cognitive impairment. Within the context of shared decision‐making between clinician, patient, and family, proper diagnosis is essential. In addition to discussing the benefits and risks of AAMA therapy, the experienced clinician must empathetically assist in bridging the gap between expectations of benefit and the patient's overall diagnostic suitability for AAMA therapy. Highlights In order to prescribe an anti‐amyloid monoclonal antibody (AAMA) to the right patients, those selected for treatment should be diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia, have elevated brain amyloid‐β (Aβ), and have good physical, psychiatric, or medical health. Persons with Alzheimer's biology as the primary etiology are the ideal AAMA treatment recipients. A novel activity necessary to optimize therapeutic response is to exclude persons with clinical or biomarker evidence of alternative contributory brain disorders. While mild clinical severity and elevated brain amyloid‐β are essential elements for selecting patients for AAMA treatment, clinical judgment is required to weigh the implications of more advanced disease severity, other medical co‐morbidities, and the presence of other contributory neuropathologies.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. Through a modified‐Delphi approach and guideline‐development process (7374 publications were reviewed; 133 met inclusion criteria) an expert workgroup developed recommendations as steps in a patient‐centered evaluation process. This summary focuses on recommendations, appropriate for any practice setting, forming core elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes specialist recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings. Highlights US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. This summary focuses on recommendations, appropriate for any practice setting, forming core elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes specialist recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or a related dementia (ADRD) are two decades old. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. An expert workgroup conducted a review of 7374 publications (133 met inclusion criteria) and developed recommendations as steps in an evaluation process. This summary briefly reviews core recommendations and details specialist recommendations of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes primary care recommendations. If clinicians use the recommendations in this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings. Highlights US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. This summary focuses on recommendations appropriate for specialty practice settings, forming key elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes primary care recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's Disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. As part of the modified Delphi approach and guideline development process (7374 publications were reviewed; 133 met inclusion criteria) an expert workgroup developed recommendations as steps in a patient‐centered evaluation process. The workgroup provided a summary of validated instruments to measure symptoms in daily life (including cognition, mood and behavior, and daily function) and to test for signs of cognitive impairment in the office. This article distills this information to provide a resource to support clinicians in the implementation of this approach in clinical practice. The companion articles provide context for primary care and specialty clinicians with regard to how to fit these instruments into the workflow and actions to take when integration of performance on these instruments with clinical profile and clinician judgment support potential cognitive impairment.

Abstract Aims Excessive alcohol use is associated with an increased risk of cognitive impairment. Since increased amyloid plaque burden exacerbates cognitive decline, we sought to assess the potential impact of alcohol use disorder (AUD) on cognition, memory, and amyloid burden corresponding with age. Methods We conducted the retrospective analysis with 6036 subjects, including 269 AUD+ subjects. A four-item CAGE (C—Cutting Down, A—Annoyance by Criticism, G—Guilty Feeling, E—Eye-openers) alcohol questionnaire was given during the recruitment to determine AUD in each participant. We assessed cognitive function, focusing on memory using neuropsychological testing. For 1038 participants, including 57 AUD+ subjects, we measured amyloid burden using the 11C Pittsburgh Compound B tracer-based positron emission tomography imaging. Results AUD+ was significantly associated with lower scores of cognition and memory function relative to AUD− individuals. No significant association was found with AUD and elevated brain amyloid under the age of 65. However, further analysis showed that those aged ≥65 showed greater odds for abnormal amyloid in AUD+ compared to AUD− participants. Conclusions Our results underscore AUD as a risk factor for cognitive decline and diminished memory, particularly in aging populations. The role of AUD in brain amyloid accumulation requires further study.