AbstractIntroductionOne goal of the Longitudinal Early Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS) is to define the fluid biomarker characteristics of early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD).MethodsCerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of Aβ1‐40, Aβ1‐42, total tau (tTau), pTau181, VILIP‐1, SNAP‐25, neurogranin (Ng), neurofilament light chain (NfL), and YKL‐40 were measured by immunoassay in 165 LEADS participants. The associations of biomarker concentrations with diagnostic group and standard cognitive tests were evaluated.ResultsBiomarkers were correlated with one another. Levels of CSF Aβ42/40, pTau181, tTau, SNAP‐25, and Ng in EOAD differed significantly from cognitively normal and early‐onset non‐AD dementia; NfL, YKL‐40, and VILIP‐1 did not. Across groups, all biomarkers except SNAP‐25 were correlated with cognition. Within the EOAD group, Aβ42/40, NfL, Ng, and SNAP‐25 were correlated with at least one cognitive measure.DiscussionThis study provides a comprehensive analysis of CSF biomarkers in sporadic EOAD that can inform EOAD clinical trial design.
Location of pathogenic variants in PSEN1 impacts progression of cognitive, clinical, and neurodegenerative measures in autosomal‐dominant Alzheimer's disease
AbstractAlthough pathogenic variants in PSEN1 leading to autosomal‐dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) are highly penetrant, substantial interindividual variability in the rates of cognitive decline and biomarker change are observed in ADAD. We hypothesized that this interindividual variability may be associated with the location of the pathogenic variant within PSEN1. PSEN1 pathogenic variant carriers participating in the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN) observational study were grouped based on whether the underlying variant affects a transmembrane (TM) or cytoplasmic (CY) protein domain within PSEN1. CY and TM carriers and variant non‐carriers (NC) who completed clinical evaluation, multimodal neuroimaging, and lumbar puncture for collection of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) as part of their participation in DIAN were included in this study. Linear mixed effects models were used to determine differences in clinical, cognitive, and biomarker measures between the NC, TM, and CY groups. While both the CY and TM groups were found to have similarly elevated Aβ compared to NC, TM carriers had greater cognitive impairment, smaller hippocampal volume, and elevated phosphorylated tau levels across the spectrum of pre‐symptomatic and symptomatic phases of disease as compared to CY, using both cross‐sectional and longitudinal data. As distinct portions of PSEN1 are differentially involved in APP processing by γ‐secretase and the generation of toxic β‐amyloid species, these results have important implications for understanding the pathobiology of ADAD and accounting for a substantial portion of the interindividual heterogeneity in ongoing ADAD clinical trials.
Brain network decoupling with increased serum neurofilament and reduced cognitive function in Alzheimer’s disease
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.
Progressive white matter injury in autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease is strongly associated with cerebral microbleeds and neurodegeneration
AbstractBackgroundWhite matter (WM) injury visible on MRI is a common finding in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and is often attributed to small vessel ischemic changes secondary to increased systemic vascular risk. Increased WM injury has been associated with the progression of Autosomal Dominant AD (ADAD), though ADAD pathogenic variant carriers are relatively young and may not have elevated vascular risk factors. We hypothesized that WM injury in ADAD may reflect worsening of cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) and neurodegeneration. Here we examine this hypothesis using cross‐sectional and longitudinal data from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network observational study (DIAN).MethodMRI data from ADAD pathogenic variant carriers (n=223) and non‐carriers (n=136) were used in the present study (Table 1). We extracted FreeSurfer‐based WM lesion (WML) volume from T1‐weighted images (hypointensities). Cortical microbleed (CMB) burden was assessed visually on susceptibility weighted/T2*‐weighted gradient echo images by experienced radiologists (blineded to the mutation status) at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester. Linear regression models compared WML volume at baseline in people with and without CMB. Linear mixed effect models assessed the relationships between longitudinal WML and both CMBs and FreeSurfer‐based total gray matter (GM) volume. Models were corrected for age and estimated years to symptom onset (EYO).ResultGreater baseline WML volume was seen in ADAD carriers vs. non‐carriers, particularly close to the age of estimated symptom onset. Baseline WML volume was greater in carriers with CMBs compared to those without (t=2.9, p=0.003, Figure 1). Longitudinal increase in WML amongst ADAD pathogenic variant carriers with CMBs was estimated to be 214 mm3/year greater than that amongst carriers without CMBs (t=4.1, p<0.001, Figure 2). Independent of this CMB effect, decreasing GM volume was strongly associated with increasing longitudinal WML volume (t=‐6.2, p<0.001, Figure 3). Similar analyses in the non‐carrier group yielded no significant findings.ConclusionConsistent with prior reports, WML volume was increased in ADAD pathogenic variant carriers. However, the results here suggest WML in ADAD may not solely be due to small vessel ischemic changes, but rather may be a result of worsening CAA and more rapid neurodegeneration.
Comparison of amyloid accumulation between Down syndrome and autosomal‐dominant Alzheimer 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.
The Institute on Methods and Protocols for Advancement of Clinical Trials for ADRD (IMPACT‐AD): An update after two years of conduct.
AbstractBackgroundWe developed the Institute on Methods and Protocols for Advancement of Clinical Trials in ADRD (IMPACT‐AD) to address the shortage of qualified investigators with adequate training and expertise to conduct Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and AD Related Dementias (ADRD) clinical trials.MethodWe describe the experience of the first two years of funding of the IMPACT‐AD course, specifically the rates of applications to the course, descriptive summaries of the accepted trainees, and the measures of participant satisfaction and learning.ResultOver the first two years of the course, we received 195 eligible applications to the course. Most (n = 121, 62%) applicants were female and nearly half self‐reported as being African American/Black, Asian, or Pacific Islander race and/or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Forty‐one applicants (21%) indicated that they were the first in their family to attend collegeOf 69 total trainees accepted to the course (36% acceptance rate), a majority (n = 44, 64%) were female. Twenty‐eight (41%) self‐reported as being African American/Black, Asian, or Pacific Islander race and eleven (16%) were of Hispanic ethnicity. Fourteen trainees (20%) identified as being the first person in their family to attend college. Among trainees, 24 (35%) were MDs, 30 (43%) were PhDs, and 9 (13%) held master’s degrees.Course lecture topics were rated, on average, as “essential” or “valuable” by 98% of trainees. Across lecture topics, on average, 48% of trainees rated their prior knowledge of topics as “very strong” or “strong,” and 11% of trainees rated their prior knowledge as “weak.” Overall, 52% of trainees evaluated their change in knowledge based on the lectures as “very much increased,” 46% as “somewhat” or “slightly” increased, and 2% as “no change.” Results were similar for the two tracks. Based on pre‐ and post‐course assessments, trainees improved their knowledge of covered content (from 62% to 79% correct responses on knowledge assessments).ConclusionThe IMPACT‐AD course is achieving its mission of educating and diversifying the next generation of ADRD trialists.We thank Dr. Laurie Ryan and Dr. Kristina McLinden from the National Institute on Aging for their key contributions in leadership and scientific guidance of IMPACT‐AD.
AD‐causing variants that affect PSEN1 transmembrane domains are associated with faster neurodegeneration and cognitive decline compared to those affecting cytoplasmic domains
AbstractBackgroundRates of cognitive and biomarker change in Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) vary substantially across individuals. Prior cross‐sectional work suggests that the location of the pathogenic variant within PSEN1, specifically whether the underlying variant affects transmembrane (TM) or cytoplasmic (CY) domains in PSEN1, may be a key determinant in these differential rates of progression. Here we use longitudinal data from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network observational study (DIAN‐Obs) to examine whether variants affecting TM versus CY domains in PSEN1 have differential rates of change in key cognitive and neurodegenerative markers, and whether these differences are relevant to ADAD clinical trials.MethodsUsing longitudinal clinical, cognitive, and MRI data from PSEN1 pathogenic variant carriers [TM group N=76 and CY group N=44; Table 1], we assessed rates of change in Mini‐Mental State Exam (MMSE), Clinical Dementia Rating® Sum of Boxes (CDR®‐SOB), and hippocampal volume (HV) using linear mixed effects models accounting for disease stage (estimated years to symptom onset [EYO]). We further assessed how PSEN1 mutation location (TM versus CY) impacts sample size and detectable effect size in a potential ADAD clinical trial (modeled as a 4‐year trial with annual assessments; 80% power; α = 0.05).ResultsPSEN1 TM and PSEN1 CY groups did not differ on baseline age, EYO, or CDR®. The PSEN1 TM group had significantly greater rates of change on MMSE (B[SE] = ‐0.42[0.1], p=0.002), CDR®‐SOB (B[SE] = 0.23[0.1], p=0.001), and HV atrophy (B[SE] = ‐58.93[14.3], p=0.0006 compared to the PSEN1 CY group (Fig.1). Consistent with these differential rates of change, power analyses indicated the required sample size to detect a 30% treatment effect on MMSE or HV would be reduced by 59.6% for MMSE and 91.0% for HV for a trial population comprised of PSEN1 TM versus CY carriers (Fig.2).ConclusionsIndividuals who had a variant affecting the transmembrane domains of PSEN1 had greater rates of cognitive decline and neurodegeneration compared to those with variants affecting cytoplasmic domains. In addition to having implications for ADAD pathophysiology, these results suggest that incorporating information regarding the location of PSEN1 variants may be beneficial in analyzing and designing stratification approaches for ADAD trials.
AD‐causing variants that affect PSEN1 transmembrane domains are associated with faster neurodegeneration and cognitive decline compared to those affecting cytoplasmic domains.
AbstractBackgroundRates of cognitive and biomarker change in Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) vary substantially across individuals. Prior cross‐sectional work suggests that the location of the pathogenic variant within PSEN1, specifically whether the underlying variant affects transmembrane (TM) or cytoplasmic (CY) domains in PSEN1, may be a key determinant in these differential rates of progression. Here we use longitudinal data from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network observational study (DIAN‐Obs) to examine whether variants affecting TM versus CY domains in PSEN1 have differential rates of change in key cognitive and neurodegenerative markers, and whether these differences are relevant to ADAD clinical trials.MethodsUsing longitudinal clinical, cognitive, and MRI data from PSEN1 pathogenic variant carriers [TM group N=76 and CY group N=44; Table 1], we assessed rates of change in Mini‐Mental State Exam (MMSE), Clinical Dementia Rating® Sum of Boxes (CDR®‐SOB), and hippocampal volume (HV) using linear mixed effects models accounting for disease stage (estimated years to symptom onset [EYO]). We further assessed how PSEN1 mutation location (TM versus CY) impacts sample size and detectable effect size in a potential ADAD clinical trial (modeled as a 4‐year trial with annual assessments; 80% power; α = 0.05).Results PSEN1 TM and PSEN1 CY groups did not differ on baseline age, EYO, or CDR®. The PSEN1 TM group had significantly greater rates of change on MMSE (B[SE] = ‐0.42[0.1], p=0.002), CDR®‐SOB (B[SE] = 0.23[0.1], p=0.001), and HV atrophy (B[SE] = ‐58.93[14.3], p=0.0006 compared to the PSEN1 CY group (Fig.1). Consistent with these differential rates of change, power analyses indicated the required sample size to detect a 30% treatment effect on MMSE or HV would be reduced by 59.6% for MMSE and 91.0% for HV for a trial population comprised of PSEN1 TM versus CY carriers (Fig.2).ConclusionsIndividuals who had a variant affecting the transmembrane domains of PSEN1 had greater rates of cognitive decline and neurodegeneration compared to those with variants affecting cytoplasmic domains. In addition to having implications for ADAD pathophysiology, these results suggest that incorporating information regarding the location of PSEN1 variants may be beneficial in analyzing and designing stratification approaches for ADAD trials.
Comparison of amyloid accumulation between Down syndrome and autosomal‐dominant Alzheimer 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.
First presentation with neuropsychiatric symptoms in autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease: the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer’s Network Study