Klunk, William E.

AbstractBackgroundDifferences between on‐ and off‐target retention characteristics between [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir (FTP) complicate the harmonization across tracers. Our objective here was to separate the impact of the reference region by evaluating correlations between [18F]MK6240 (MK) and [18F]FTP standard uptake values (SUVs).MethodParticipants (Figure 1, n=90) received an amyloid‐β (Aβ) PET scan ([11C]PIB or [18F]NAV4694) and two tau‐PET scans: [18F]MK (90‐110 minutes post‐injection) and [18F]FTP (80‐100 minutes post‐injection). For all PET scans, the individual frames were realigned, averaged, and co‐registered to a Freesurfer 7.1‐segmented T1‐MPRAGE. SUVs were calculated in the reference region (inferior cerebellar gray), on‐target regions (entorhinal cortex, hippocampus, Braak III, Braak IV, Braak V, Braak VI) and off‐target regions (caudate, pallidum, putamen, thalamus, cerebellar white matter, choroid plexus, meninges, eroded white matter). We examined correlations between [18F]MK and [18F]FTP SUV values as a function of Aβ status, as well as their associations with age.ResultAll correlations (Figure 2) were significant at p<0.001. The interaction with Aβ status was significant for hippocampus, BraakIII‐V and the metatemporal region. In Aβ+ participants, [18F]FTP and [18F]MK6240 have similar SUVs in on‐target regions with a slope close to 1 except for in hippocampus and Braak VI. However, [18F]FTP SUVs, on average, were greater than [18F]MK SUVs in Aβ+ and Aβ‐ subjects in the reference region and all off‐target regions except for meninges, and in Aβ‐ subjects in the on‐target regions. Age correlated with [18F]FTP SUVs in Aβ‐ subjects in all regions (except the reference region, Braak VI and meninges) and [18F]MK SUVs in putamen and pallidum, but this correlation was only significant (p<0.01) when young and old subjects were included.ConclusionDespite [18F]MK’s higher affinity for tau and SUVR dynamic range being twice that of [18F]FTP, the SUVs in on‐target regions are similar. The higher [18F]FTP signal in the reference region appears to be the contributing factor to the lower dynamic range. The higher [18F]FTP signal in on‐target regions for Aβ‐ subjects may reflect the presence of off‐target signals in these subjects. Taking off‐target signals into account should improve correlations between the two tracers, especially when measuring the earliest deposition of tau.

AbstractBackgroundThe newly proposed criteria by the AA working group incorporates both biological and clinical stages to characterize the progression of AD. In this study, we aim to evaluate the agreement between these two complementary systems.MethodsUsing 188 participants from McGill TRIAD and 139 from the HEAD cohorts, we categorized participants into biological (0‐4) and clinical (0‐4) stages using amyloid PET, tau PET(MK‐6240), and clinical measures as described by the working group. Participants were then stratified into three categories: congruent (clinical = biological), higher in the biological stage (clinical < biological), and higher in the clinical stage (clinical > biological). In the TRIAD cohort, we further compared these groups for age, sex, years of education, vascular burden (WMH), microglial activation (PBR scan), Astrocyte reactivity (GFAP), amyloid load, tau load, and NPI‐Q scores using Welch two‐sided t‐test with FDR multiple comparison correction.ResultsIn the TRIAD cohort, 34% of participants were congruent, 24.5% had a higher clinical stage, and 41.5% had a higher biological stage. Meanwhile in the HEAD cohort 68.2% were congruent, 20.7% had a higher clinical stage, and 17% had a higher biological stage. TRIAD participants with a higher clinical stage had lower education (P = 0.02), more neuropsychiatric symptoms (P = 0.03), and a higher vascular burden (P = 0.03) (Table 1). As expected, people with higher biological stage had more amyloid(P<0.001), tau(P<0.001), and astrocyte reactivity(P<0.001) (Table 1, Figure 2).ConclusionsOur findings highlight important discordance between clinical and biological stages, which could be partially explained by cognitive reserve. This was supported by the protective effects of educational attainment in participants with a higher biological stage. Vascular burden played a major role in the cognitive impairment of individuals with higher clinical stages. Future studies should replicate these findings in larger more representative population‐based cohorts.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONAmyloidosis, including cerebral amyloid angiopathy, and markers of small vessel disease (SVD) vary across dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease (DIAD) presenilin‐1 (PSEN1) mutation carriers. We investigated how mutation position relative to codon 200 (pre‐/postcodon 200) influences these pathologic features and dementia at different stages.METHODSIndividuals from families with known PSEN1 mutations (n = 393) underwent neuroimaging and clinical assessments. We cross‐sectionally evaluated regional Pittsburgh compound B‐positron emission tomography uptake, magnetic resonance imaging markers of SVD (diffusion tensor imaging‐based white matter injury, white matter hyperintensity volumes, and microhemorrhages), and cognition.RESULTSPostcodon 200 carriers had lower amyloid burden in all regions but worse markers of SVD and worse Clinical Dementia Rating® scores compared to precodon 200 carriers as a function of estimated years to symptom onset. Markers of SVD partially mediated the mutation position effects on clinical measures.DISCUSSIONWe demonstrated the genotypic variability behind spatiotemporal amyloidosis, SVD, and clinical presentation in DIAD, which may inform patient prognosis and clinical trials.Highlights Mutation position influences Aβ burden, SVD, and dementia. PSEN1 pre‐200 group had stronger associations between Aβ burden and disease stage. PSEN1 post‐200 group had stronger associations between SVD markers and disease stage. PSEN1 post‐200 group had worse dementia score than pre‐200 in late disease stage. Diffusion tensor imaging‐based SVD markers mediated mutation position effects on dementia in the late stage.

AbstractBackgroundTriplication of the APP allele in Down syndrome (DS) leads to excess amyloid production and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) related cognitive decline. Key biomarkers (amyloid, tau, neurodegeneration) can identify pathological processes that occur before clinical symptoms and more precisely stage adults with DS along the AD continuum. Previous research has used changes in cortical thickness (CT) as an indicator of neurodegeneration in autosomal‐dominant AD1, but not DS‐related AD. It is unclear when and where cortical thinning occurs along the AD continuum in DS and if these differences are associated with increasing AD pathology.MethodCross‐sectional analysis compared DS participants from the Alzheimer Biomarkers Consortium‐Down Syndrome (106 amyloid‐/cognitively unimpaired, nonclinical, 20% reserved for receiver‐operating characteristic, ROC, analyses; 45 amyloid+/cognitively unimpaired, preclinical; 27 amyloid+/cognitively impaired, clinical) who had amyloid positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Amyloid positivity was defined using standardized uptake value ratio (partial volume corrected) cortical mean values (1.42/1.19 for PIB/AV452) and impairment was based on consensus diagnosis. CT differences between nonclinical and clinical groups were calculated in FreeSurfer v5.3 for multiple thresholds (p<.05/.01/.005/.001/.0005/.0001) using a cluster‐wise false discovery rate of .001, corrected across hemispheres, after controlling for age and sex. CT values were extracted for each threshold and used in ROC analyses (nonclinical reserved participants compared against preclinical and preclinical compared against clinical) to identify key cortical regions that best discriminated amyloid positivity and between unimpaired and impaired.ResultSignificant decreases in parietal and inferior temporal CT were observed between nonclinical and clinical (Figures 1 and 2). ROC analyses identified regions in the left (threshold .05) and right (threshold .005) hemispheres that best differentiated nonclinical from preclinical. Observed area under the curves (AUCs) of .772 and .830 exceeded those previously reported for autosomal‐dominant AD (.547/.540)1. Analyses differentiating preclinical from clinical observed AUCs of .786 for left (threshold .0005) and .770 for right (threshold .0005) hemispheres.ConclusionCT differences primarily within posterior cortical regions differentiated adults with DS by amyloid status and cognitive impairment. CT differences were more diffuse for amyloid positivity but more focal for impairment.1. Dincer (2020). NeuroImage: Clinical, 28, 102491.2. Su (2019). Alzheimer’s Dement, 11, 180‐190.

AbstractBackgroundAdults with Down Syndrome (DS) develop Alzheimer disease (AD)‐like pathology and dementia as they age. This is attributed to triplication of the amyloid precursor protein gene. Recent work demonstrated that amyloid is elevated in DS and accumulates in a similar topography to autosomal dominant AD (ADAD). Tau accumulation is the second hallmark of AD and may be measured using tau positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. The pattern of tau accumulation remains unknown in DS.MethodIn a cross‐sectional analysis we evaluated amyloid and tau positron emission tomography (PET) in 124 participants with DS (109 cognitively stable, 8 symptomatic, 7 no consensus), 29 ADAD mutation carriers (26 asymptomatic, 3 symptomatic), and 201 cognitively normal non‐mutation carriers (CN). Regional cortical standard uptake value ratios (SUVR) for tau imaging were obtained and compared by cognitive status. Similarly, regional cortical amyloid SUVR were obtained and converted to centiloids. We then compared the magnitude of tau burden as well as spatial spread of tau across groups relative to amyloid burden.ResultCompared to CN, tau PET binding was elevated in participants with (µDS = 2.12 ± 0.22 SUVR, µADAD = 2.52 ± 0.37 SUVR) and without (µDS = 1.24 ± 0.15 SUVR, µADAD = 1.16 ± 0.19 SUVR) cognitive changes. For both groups, tau increased with increasing amyloid (centiloids). In some regions, DS had greater tau burden for a given amyloid level (centiloids) (Figure 1). There was increased spatial distribution of tau throughout the brain for participants with DS compared to CN. In contrast, tau burden was more focal in participants with ADAD with tau primarily elevated in posterior regions (Figure 2).ConclusionWhile tau burden was higher with symptomatic disease for both groups, significant differences existed in the overall amount and spatial spread. Tau spread was greatest in participants with DS and more diffuse compared to ADAD. These results indicate a substantial tau burden is present in DS, and suggest not only anti‐amyloid but also tau‐reducing agents should be considered for treating cognitive decline in adults with DS.

AbstractCarriers of mutations responsible for dominantly inherited Alzheimer disease provide a unique opportunity to study potential imaging biomarkers. Biomarkers based on routinely acquired clinical MR images, could supplement the extant invasive or logistically challenging) biomarker studies. We used 1104 longitudinal MR, 324 amyloid beta, and 87 tau positron emission tomography imaging sessions from 525 participants enrolled in the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network Observational Study to extract novel imaging metrics representing the mean (μ) and standard deviation (σ) of standardized image intensities of T1‐weighted and Fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) MR scans. There was an exponential decrease in FLAIR‐μ in mutation carriers and an increase in FLAIR and T1 signal heterogeneity (T1‐σ and FLAIR‐σ) as participants approached the symptom onset in both supramarginal, the right postcentral and right superior temporal gyri as well as both caudate nuclei, putamina, thalami, and amygdalae. After controlling for the effect of regional atrophy, FLAIR‐μ decreased and T1‐σ and FLAIR‐σ increased with increasing amyloid beta and tau deposition in numerous cortical regions. In symptomatic mutation carriers and independent of the effect of regional atrophy, tau pathology demonstrated a stronger relationship with image intensity metrics, compared with amyloid pathology. We propose novel MR imaging intensity‐based metrics using standard clinical T1 and FLAIR images which strongly associates with the progression of pathology in dominantly inherited Alzheimer disease. We suggest that tau pathology may be a key driver of the observed changes in this cohort of patients.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONDown syndrome (DS) is a genetic cause of early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (AD). The National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association AT(N) Research Framework is a staging model for AD biomarkers but has not been assessed in DS.METHODData are from the Alzheimer's Biomarker Consortium–Down Syndrome. Positron emission tomography (PET) amyloid beta (Aβ; 15 mCi of [11C]Pittsburgh compound B) and tau (10 mCi of [18F]AV‐1451) were used to classify amyloid (A) –/+ and tau (T) +/–. Hippocampal volume classified neurodegeneration (N) –/+. The modified Cued Recall Test assessed episodic memory.RESULTSAnalyses included 162 adults with DS (aged M = 38.84 years, standard deviation = 8.41). Overall, 69.8% of participants were classified as A–/T–/(N)–, 11.1% were A+/T–/(N)–, 5.6% were A+/T+/(N)–, and 9.3% were A+/T+/(N)+. Participants deemed cognitively stable were most likely to be A–T–(N)– and A+T–(N)–. Tau PET (T+) most closely aligning with memory impairment and AD clinical status.DISCUSSIONFindings add to understanding of AT(N) biomarker profiles in DS.Highlights Overall, 69.8% of adults with Down syndrome (DS) aged 25 to 61 years were classified as amyloid (A)–/tau (T)–/neurodegeneration (N)–, 11.1% were A+/T–/(N)–, 5.6% were A+/T+/(N)–, and 9.3% were A+/T+/(N)+. The AT(N) profiles were associated with clinical Alzheimer's disease (AD) status and with memory performance, with the presence of T+ aligned with AD clinical symptomology. Findings inform models for predicting the transition to the prodromal stage of AD in DS.

Abstract Neurofilament light chain, a putative measure of neuronal damage, is measurable in blood and CSF and is predictive of cognitive function in individuals with Alzheimer’s disease. There has been limited prior work linking neurofilament light and functional connectivity, and no prior work has investigated neurofilament light associations with functional connectivity in autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease. Here, we assessed relationships between blood neurofilament light, cognition, and functional connectivity in a cross-sectional sample of 106 autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease mutation carriers and 76 non-carriers. We employed an innovative network-level enrichment analysis approach to assess connectome-wide associations with neurofilament light. Neurofilament light was positively correlated with deterioration of functional connectivity within the default mode network and negatively correlated with connectivity between default mode network and executive control networks, including the cingulo-opercular, salience, and dorsal attention networks. Further, reduced connectivity within the default mode network and between the default mode network and executive control networks was associated with reduced cognitive function. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that neurofilament levels and functional connectivity within the default mode network and between the default mode network and the dorsal attention network explained significant variance in cognitive composite scores when controlling for age, sex, and education. A mediation analysis demonstrated that functional connectivity within the default mode network and between the default mode network and dorsal attention network partially mediated the relationship between blood neurofilament light levels and cognitive function. Our novel results indicate that blood estimates of neurofilament levels correspond to direct measurements of brain dysfunction, shedding new light on the underlying biological processes of Alzheimer’s disease. Further, we demonstrate how variation within key brain systems can partially mediate the negative effects of heightened total serum neurofilament levels, suggesting potential regions for targeted interventions. Finally, our results lend further evidence that low-cost and minimally invasive blood measurements of neurofilament may be a useful marker of brain functional connectivity and cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease.

AbstractBackgroundGiven the triplication of chromosome 21 and the location of the amyloid precursor protein gene on chromosome 21, almost all adults with Down syndrome (DS) develop Alzheimer disease (AD)‐like pathology and dementia during their lifetime. Comparing amyloid accumulation in DS to autosomal dominant AD (ADAD), another genetic form of AD, may improve our understanding of early AD pathology development.MethodWe assessed amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in 192 participants with DS and 33 sibling controls from the Alzheimer’s Biomarker Consortium‐Down Syndrome (ABC‐DS) and 265 mutation‐carriers (MC) and 169 familial controls from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN) (Table 1). We calculated regional standard uptake value ratios (SUVR) using a cerebellar cortex reference region and converted global amyloid burden SUVR to centiloids. We compared amyloid PET by cognitive status and estimated‐years‐to‐symptom‐onset (EYO). EYO was calculated for DIAN participants by subtracting their age from parental age of symptom onset and for ABC‐DS participants by subtracting their age from 50.2 years, a published average age of symptom onset in a large sample of individuals with DS (Fortea et al., 2020). In a subset of participants, we assessed the relationship between amyloid PET and CSF Aβ42/40.ResultThe relationship between CSF Aβ42/40 and amyloid PET was similar in DS and MC participants (Figure 1). We did not observe significant differences between MC and DS grouped by cognitive status (Figure 2). However, when assessed over EYO, global amyloid burden was significantly elevated in MC at EYO ≥ ‐23 but was not elevated in DS until EYO ≥ ‐15 (Figure 3). We observed early cortical and subcortical amyloid PET increases in both groups, but we also measured some regional differences in amyloid PET changes between MC and DS, specifically in the medial occipital region (Figure 4 and 5).ConclusionThese results demonstrate similarities in the relationship between amyloid biomarkers and the levels of amyloid accumulation in ADAD and DS. However, we also observed a 5‐10 year delay and some regional differences in amyloid accumulation in DS. This is important for future clinical trials to consider when recruiting participants and determining treatment efficacy.

AbstractBackgroundGiven the triplication of chromosome 21 and the location of the amyloid precursor protein gene on chromosome 21, almost all adults with Down syndrome (DS) develop Alzheimer disease (AD)‐like pathology and dementia during their lifetime. Comparing amyloid accumulation in DS to autosomal dominant AD (ADAD), another genetic form of AD, may improve our understanding of early AD pathology development.MethodWe assessed amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in 192 participants with DS and 33 sibling controls from the Alzheimer’s Biomarker Consortium‐Down Syndrome (ABC‐DS) and 265 mutation‐carriers (MC) and 169 familial controls from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN) (Table 1). We calculated regional standard uptake value ratios (SUVR) using a cerebellar cortex reference region and converted global amyloid burden SUVR to centiloids. We compared amyloid PET by cognitive status and estimated‐years‐to‐symptom‐onset (EYO). EYO was calculated for DIAN participants by subtracting their age from parental age of symptom onset and for ABC‐DS participants by subtracting their age from 50.2 years, a published average age of symptom onset in a large sample of individuals with DS (Fortea et al., 2020). In a subset of participants, we assessed the relationship between amyloid PET and CSF Aβ42/40.ResultThe relationship between CSF Aβ42/40 and amyloid PET was similar in DS and MC participants (Figure 1). We did not observe significant differences between MC and DS grouped by cognitive status (Figure 2). However, when assessed over EYO, global amyloid burden was significantly elevated in MC at EYO ≥ ‐23 but was not elevated in DS until EYO ≥ ‐15 (Figure 3). We observed early cortical and subcortical amyloid PET increases in both groups, but we also measured some regional differences in amyloid PET changes between MC and DS, specifically in the medial occipital region (Figure 4 and 5).ConclusionThese results demonstrate similarities in the relationship between amyloid biomarkers and the levels of amyloid accumulation in ADAD and DS. However, we also observed a 5‐10 year delay and some regional differences in amyloid accumulation in DS. This is important for future clinical trials to consider when recruiting participants and determining treatment efficacy.