Forsberg, Leah K.

AbstractBackgroundUp to 30% of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) cases are due to known pathogenic mutations (f‐FTD). Little is known about the factors that predict who will choose to learn their results. Upcoming clinical trials in f‐FTD may require disclosure prior to enrollment, even before symptom onset, and thus characterizing this sample is important. Furthermore, understanding the mood impacts of genetic disclosure may guide genetic counseling practice.MethodF‐FTD participants (n=568) from families with a known pathogenic mutation (MAPT, C9orf72, GRN) were enrolled through the ARTFL/LEFFTDS Longitudinal FTD Study (ALLFTD) and provided the opportunity for disclosure. Independent‐sample t‐tests compared demographic and psychosocial factors between participants who did and did not receive their results. In participants who were asymptomatic at baseline and follow up (n=199,177 with follow‐up), linear mixed effects modeling was used to investigate pre‐ to post‐disclosure changes in the 15‐item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS).ResultOf participants from families with a known pathogenic genetic mutation, 47% received genetic disclosure. Of the asymptomatic subset (n=386), 36% know their mutation status. Of these asymptomatic learners, 46% received disclosure through the study, and the remainder learned their genetic status prior to study enrollment. None of the analyzed demographic or psychosocial factors (i.e., sex, age, education, having children) differed between learners and non‐learners (p’s > 0.05). In the longitudinal analysis of asymptomatic participants, learners showed a pre‐ to post‐increase of 0.31 GDS points/year (95%CI: ‐0.08, 0.69, p = 0.12), whereas non‐learners showed a slight decline (‐0.15 points/year, 95%CI: ‐0.36, 0.06, p = 0.16). This difference between slopes was statistically significant (0.46, 95%CI: 0.02, 0.89, p=0.04) but represents a small clinical effect. In asymptomatic learners, slopes did not differ based on mutation status (0.28, 95%CI: ‐0.66, 1.20, p=0.55). Conclusions were based on the estimates and full range of confidence intervals.ConclusionThe majority of asymptomatic research participants do not know their genetic status, which will be a consideration for clinical trials that require disclosure. No considered demographic factors were strongly associated with the decision to receive disclosure. The findings suggest that disclosure in asymptomatic participants has minimal impact on depressive symptoms regardless of genetic results.

AbstractBackgroundCaregiving for persons with dementia negatively impacts physical and mental health, including increased risk for chronic loneliness and isolation. This Phase I study aimed to recruit former and current dementia caregivers as engaged partners in the design of a unique, technology‐assisted pairing platform to match caregivers to one another for meaningful connection and support based on characteristics chosen by the caregivers themselves.MethodWe recruited thirty‐two caregivers to participate in two semi‐structured focus groups (audio recorded for qualitative analyses) and complete a survey to understand the characteristics desired in another caregiver for the purpose of emotional support. Participants interacted with a website prototype on their personal device and completed a user experience feedback form. An iterative process was used to design the website and matching questionnaire allowing participants to validate preferences and concerns. Website analytics were captured (e.g. time to answer each question, total time spent on the website).ResultThe efforts culminated in a website ‘look and feel’ that addressed the preferences and criticisms of study participants. Figure 1 shows the home page slider inviting caregivers to join (images 1‐3) and describes the matching process (4); the caregiver answers up to 34 questions to create a profile (5‐7) and the website provides a list of caregivers that best match criteria (8). Overall, 87% of study participants rated a high level of comfort with completing the personal profile questions; 82% felt confident the questions asked would lead to a good match. An algorithm to match caregivers was created using the profile questions which asked participants to self‐select and then rank the characteristics of highest importance. Good and poor matches are scored by the algorithm, with 1 being a “perfect” match (Figure 2). In the current cohort, each participant had at least one match that scored 0.708 or higher.ConclusionOur study established interest in a technology assisted peer‐to‐peer caregiver matching program that is a potential low‐cost, high‐impact resource. The study resulted in a set of matching characteristics and an algorithm prototype within a user influenced website and will be further tested in Phase 2. Research supported from NIA of the NIH.

AbstractBackgroundFrontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) refers to a group of neurodegenerative conditions, affecting the frontal and/or temporal lobes. Ongoing research has provided insight into developing clinical trials for FTLD and key clinical measures such as structural MRI. To inform clinical trial design and optimize participation, it is imperative to explore facilitators and barriers for potential candidates.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to explore facilitators and barriers to participating in future clinical trials for FTLD.MethodsAdvancing Research and Treatment for Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ARTFL) and Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Frontotemporal Dementia Subjects (LEFFTDS) are observational studies focused on characterizing FTLD syndromes in preparation for clinical trials. The 584 participants enrolled across 18 research sites in the United States and Canada completed a survey assessing interest in clinical trial participation.Results29% of respondents self‐reported as patients (63±10 years), 26% self‐reported as caregivers answering on behalf of patients (65±10 years), and 45% self‐reported as healthy but at risk for FTLD (48±14 years). Travel reimbursement was the most common factor reported to positively influence participation (≧66%), with the healthy but at risk group showing the strongest endorsement (83%). Cost and time involved in travel were possible barriers for about half of the patients (48%) and healthy but at risk respondents (53%). The respondents value receiving feedback on the study findings (≧80%) and being informed of their individual disease progression (≧75%). Particularly, keeping participation confidential was very important for the healthy but at risk group (62%). In regard to research assessments, most participants demonstrated a high interest in physical and neurological exams at a research center (≧87%) whereas only half were interested in doing more invasive procedures such as the lumbar puncture (≧52%). Overall, respondents showed a positive attitude and support for research participation (≧77%) and trusted that their health information would remain confidential in a clinical trial (≧53%).ConclusionsFavorable attitudes and interest towards medical research exist among participants. To optimize participation, clinical trials should allocate funding for travel and involve participants in feedback about study results and their disease progression. Alternatives to invasive assessments may increase participation.

AbstractBackgroundIsolated REM Sleep Behavior Disorder (iRBD) patients are known to be at high risk for developing an overt synucleinopathy – particularly Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) and Parkinson’s Disease (PD). Reduced nigrostriatal uptake on 123I‐FP‐CIT SPECT reflects dopamine deficiency, which is common in the overt synucleinopathies. We sought to assess how 123I‐FP‐CIT SPECT imaging in iRBD changes longitudinally and whether an abnormal 123I‐FP‐CIT SPECT scan precedes and predicts future transition to an overt synucleinopathy.MethodParticipants with polysomnography‐confirmed iRBD from the Mayo Clinic Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center database +/‐ North American Prodromal Synucleinopathy (NAPS) Consortium who had two or more longitudinal 123I‐FP‐CIT SPECT scans and been followed prospectively for at least 24 months were included in this analysis. Striatonigral dopamine transporter uptake was evaluated semi‐quantitatively with 123I‐FP‐CIT SPECT using DaTQUANT software (GE Healthcare) to calculate z‐scores of putamen uptake.ResultThirty‐five iRBD participants (86% male) were evaluated prospectively (mean 62.5 ± 19.4 months) and underwent two or more 123I‐FP‐CIT SPECT scans at a minimum of 12 months intervals. Thirteen participants (37%) developed an overt synucleinopathy (11 DLB and 2 PD; phenoconverters) and 22 participants (63%) remained as iRBD (stable iRBD). Phenoconverters were older (mean 70.8 ± 7.0 vs 63.4 ± 6.0 years old) and had more negative DaTQUANT putamen z‐scores (mean ‐1.68 ± 1.42 vs ‐0.33 ± 1.52) than stable iRBD participants at baseline. Among phenoconverters, nine participants (69%) had one or more 123I‐FP‐CIT SPECT scans with DaTQUANT putamen z‐score of <‐2.0 prior to phenoconversion, and mean time from initial DaTQUANT putamen z‐score of <‐2.0 to phenoconversion was 36.8 ± 28.7 months. In stable RBD participants, eight participants (36%) showed a decline in DaTQUANT putamen z‐score of >1 between the most recent and the baseline scan, and four participants (18%) presented DaTQUANT putamen z‐score of <‐2.0 at the most recent scan.ConclusionThese findings suggest that a decline in putamen uptake on 123I‐FP‐CIT SPECT in iRBD serves as a predictor and a surrogate biomarker for progression of iRBD to an overt synucleinopathy.

AbstractBackgroundClinical trials are underway to treat familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration (f‐FTLD). This is a rare disease, and a limited number of mutation carriers have been identified; thus, efficient trial design is critical. Multimodal, latent disease progression models (DPM) can estimate time to symptom onset and define the temporal ordering of biomarker changes. DPMs can also be leveraged to select endpoints and potentially supplement analyses by integrating historical data. Recent draft FDA guidance for gene therapy trials in neurological disease supports these novel approaches to clinical trials.MethodParticipants included 1,049 members of families affected by f‐FTLD, due to mutations in GRN, MAPT, or C9orf72 genes, who were enrolled in ALLFTD or GENFI. A Bayesian repeated measures model incorporated multimodal data to estimate disease progression, conditional on latent disease age (proximity to symptom onset), in 677 mutations carriers (GRN (n=233), MAPT (n=151) and C9orf72 (n=293)). Family members without pathogenic mutations were used as the reference group. Mean follow‐up was 1.1 (SD=1.1) years. Jointly modeled longitudinal variables included neuropsychological scores, CDR®+NACC‐FTLD Box Score, MRI volumes of brain regions affected by f‐FTLD, and plasma levels of neurofilament light chain (NfL).ResultDisease progression curves were similar across ALLFTD and GENFI cohorts. Plasma NfL elevations occurred earliest, up to 10 years before symptom onset, and NfL was the most powerful endpoint in the asymptomatic stage. MRI abnormalities occurred next, closer to symptom onset. The earliest MRI changes relative to symptom onset were observed in C9orf72+. GRN mutation carriers showed the most rapid acceleration in all biomarkers, and this acceleration occurred in close proximity to symptom onset. Neuropsychological measures and CDR®+NACC‐FTLD Box Score were among the most promising endpoints in the symptomatic stage. Trial simulations indicated that using latent disease age as an enrollment criterion would allow some asymptomatic mutation carriers to be enrolled without sacrificing power.ConclusionSimilarity in disease progression across ALLFTD and GENFI participants suggests these models will apply to international trials. Model‐derived estimates of disease progression curves indicate that endpoint selection should be specific to disease stage and mutation, and DPMs would facilitate greater participant enrollment.

AbstractBackgroundIn preparation for treatment trials in frontotemporal dementia (FTD), sensitive assessments to detect early clinical deficits and track longitudinal changes are needed. Remote digital data collection using smartphones may improve sensitivity to detect and follow abnormalities by allowing novel methods of data capture and more frequent assessments. Furthermore, remote evaluations can reduce patient and staff burden. Despite these benefits, little is known about the reliability and validity of self‐administered cognitive testing completed on smartphones.MethodWe investigated self‐administered smartphone cognitive tests from the ALLFTD Mobile App in a mixed sample of 45 participants, including 10 functionally intact older adults, 24 participants from families harboring pathogenic FTD mutations (asymptomatic n=14; mildly symptomatic n=10;), and 11 symptomatic FTD‐spectrum participants. A subset (n=15) was missing CDR®+NACC‐FTLD data but consensus diagnoses were available. Participants were asked to complete five tests that were repeated three times over eight days. Tests included versions of N‐back, Stroop, Flanker, and Go/No‐Go paradigms, and an adaptive spatial working memory test. Reliability was assessed using split‐half reliability (first testing session, 100 simulations) and intraclass correlations (ICC) across the three testing sessions. Linear models were fitted to evaluate the association of test performance with age and disease severity (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD Global and Box Scores), covarying for sex and education level. Models evaluating age associations excluded symptomatic participants.ResultParticipants completed 72.4% of available instruments. Split‐half reliability (range: 0.76 to 0.97) and ICCs (0.70 to 0.92) suggested adequate‐to‐excellent internal consistency and test‐retest reliability. Across the five tests, negative associations were observed with CDR®+NACC‐FTLD Box Scores (ßs = ‐0.24 to ‐0.77), and in clinically asymptomatic individuals, negative associations were observed with age (ßs = ‐0.43 to ‐0.88). Performance on all measures was worse in symptomatic participants compared to asymptomatic (p‐values<.05). Mildly symptomatic cases (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD=0.5) performed worse on Stroop, Flanker, and spatial working memory than asymptomatic participants (p‐values<.03). Flanker and Stroop tasks consistently showed the strongest reliability and validity findings.ConclusionSmartphone adaptations of common neuropsychological tests produced promising preliminary results. Strong associations with disease severity and age suggest these metrics may be valid for detecting clinically relevant cognitive changes, even in mildly symptomatic FTD.

AbstractBackgroundClinicopathologic studies reported that the NACC Uniform Dataset (UDS) 2.0 core measures do not adequately differentiate patients who ultimately died of Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (FTLD) from Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The FTLD Module (FTLD‐MOD) assesses core features of behavioral variant FTD (bvFTD) and primary progressive aphasia (PPA). Initial investigations suggest that the FTLD‐MOD improves discrimination between biomarker‐supported bvFTD and typical late‐onset AD, and that clinically diagnosed PPA participants performed worse than bvFTD on all FTLD‐MOD language tasks. However, the utility of these measures in the differential diagnosis of AD vs. major FTLD syndromes in young‐onset cases remains underexplored.MethodWe examined participants with age‐of‐onset < 65 years in the ARTFL‐LEFFTDS Longitudinal Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ALLFTD) consortium and the Longitudinal Early Onset AD Study (LEADS). 115 bvFTD, 53 semantic variant PPA (svPPA), 29 non‐fluent variant PPA (nfvPPA) and 124 early‐onset AD (eoAD) cases completed the UDS3 and FLTD‐MOD. Linear regression analyses measured group differences in FLTD‐MOD raw scores and UDS3 neuropsychological z‐scores after accounting for group differences in demographic variables and global severity ratings. Alpha was 0.05 with Bonferroni corrections.ResultsParticipants with eoAD demonstrated the most impaired scores on tasks of attention, working memory, and processing speed, including Digit Span Backward (z=‐1.87) and Trails A (z=‐3.82). They also demonstrated difficulty on FTLD‐MOD language tasks with a working memory requirement (sentence repetition raw=3.68/5) and, as expected, memory (story delayed recall z=‐2.4z). svPPA performed the worst on FTLD‐MOD and UDS3 tasks assessing semantic memory, especially naming (all p’s ≤ 0.03). nfvPPA performed worst on sentence reading, sentence repetition, and letter fluency (all p’s ≤ 0.02). Consistent with previous work, these measures differentiate between bvFTD and PPA variants. However, relative to eoAD, bvFTD was equivalent (Trails B: bvFTDz=‐3.8, eoADz=‐3.82; p=0.12) or outperformed (sentence repetition: bvFTD=4.22/5, eoAD=3.68/5; p<0.001) the eoAD group on all tasks.ConclusionsWe undertook this analysis to compare performance of the major young‐onset sporadic AD and FTLD clinical syndromes in the ALLFTD and LEADS studies. Results demonstrate relatively distinct cognitive profiles among eoAD, svPPA, and nfvPPA, but not in bvFTD. Future analyses will include FTLD‐MOD behavioral symptom questionnaires to assess their utility in differentiating bvFTD.

AbstractBackgroundAt present, no research criteria exist for the diagnosis of prodromal behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). Leveraging data from carriers of pathogenic genetic mutations as a proxy for frontotemporal lobar degeneration pathology, we sought to develop and test a proposed set of research criteria for prodromal bvFTD, termed “Mild Behavioral and/or Cognitive Impairment in bvFTD” (MBCI‐FTD).MethodParticipants included 68 carriers of a pathogenic mutation in microtubule‐associated protein tau (MAPT), or progranulin (GRN), or a repeat expansion in chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 (C9orf72), with mild behavioral and/or cognitive changes. Based on extensive clinical workup, the prodromal mutation carrier group was divided into a Development Group (N=22) and a Test Group (N=46). The Development Group was selected to be the subset of the prodromal mutation carriers for whom we had longitudinal evidence of conversion to a bvFTD phenotype, and were used to develop the criteria. The Test Group was the remainder of the prodromal mutation carriers (e.g., single visits only) and was used to validate the criteria. Familial non‐carriers were included as controls (N=165).ResultFrequencies of behavioral and neuropsychiatric features, neuropsychological deficits, and social cognitive dysfunction in prodromal mutation carriers and non‐carrier controls were assessed. Based on sensitivity and specificity analyses, seven core features were identified: apathy without moderate‐severe dysphoria, behavioral disinhibition, irritability/agitation, reduced empathy/sympathy, repetitive behaviors (simple and/or complex), joviality/gregariousness, and appetite changes/hyperorality. Supportive features include a neuropsychological profile of impaired executive function or naming with intact orientation and visuospatial skills, reduced insight for cognitive or behavioral changes, and poor social cognition. Three core features or two core features plus one supportive feature are required for the diagnosis of Possible MBCI‐FTD; Probable MBCI‐FTD requires imaging or biomarker evidence, or a pathogenic genetic mutation. The proposed MBCI‐FTD criteria correctly classified 95% of the Development Group of prodromal mutation carriers, and 41% of the Test Group, with a false positive rate of <10%.ConclusionWe present the first diagnostic criteria for prodromal bvFTD. Future research should prioritize establishing generalizability to non‐genetic cases, and testing the specificity of these criteria against psychiatric, neurologic and other neurodegenerative diseases.

AbstractBackgroundImpaired olfaction has been associated with neurodegenerative diseases and may be a useful tool to aid in diagnosis or track disease progression. We sought to compare olfaction in participants with the clinical diagnoses of idiopathic REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), or Alzheimer’s disease dementia (AD).MethodParticipants from the Mayo Clinic Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center database who had a diagnosis of RBD (n=27, 56% male), DLB (n=51, 84% male), or AD (n=83, 47% male), and were given the Brief Smell Identification Test (B‐SIT) were included in this analysis. The B‐SIT score was calculated as the sum of correct responses (12 possible). Scores were categorized as reflecting anosmia (<6), hyposmia (6‐10), and normal olfactory function (>10). All participants underwent clinical and neuropsychological evaluations.ResultGlobal cognition was lower in AD and DLB than RBD (MMSE 21.5 ±4.9 in AD, 23.3 ±4.3 in DLB, 28.8 ± 1.2 in RBD; p <0.001). The mean B‐SIT total score was significantly lower for DLB (4.5 ± 3.1) compared to RBD (7.5 ± 3.0) or AD (7.0 ± 2.7) (p<0.001) using an ANOVA F‐test. Anosmia was present in 76% of DLB, which compared to 32% in RBD, and 32% in AD (p=0.9). Hyposmia was present in 18% of DLB, 47% of RBD, and 52% of AD (p=ns). Of 22 patients with normal olfaction, X% were DLB, X% RBD, and X% AD (p=X). An item analysis illustrated that participants with DLB were less likely to identify Menthol, Clove, Strawberry, Smoke, and Soap than those with RBD and AD. On serial examination, 12 RBD (60%) patients’ B‐SIT score decreased by at least one point at their most recent visit compared to their baseline visit.ConclusionThese findings suggest that impaired olfactory function is frequent in RBD, DLB and AD, with olfaction being worst in DLB in this cohort. Olfaction was declining in most of those with RBD who underwent serial evaluations. Further analyses are needed to determine if any scents are more sensitive to phenotype, progression, and degree of cognitive impairment. Supported by: NIH grants AG016574, NS100620, AG056639, AG015866

AbstractBackgroundBlack/African Americans (B/AA) are nearly twice as likely as White/European Americans (W/EA) to have Alzheimer’s or other dementias and are more likely to provide care for persons with dementia (PwD). Evidence indicates that B/AA desire having someone to talk with who understands their caregiving challenges, yet are less likely than W/EA to ask for support. Further, community resources supporting caregivers’ ability to maintain health and well‐being developed with input from B/AA are lacking. We aimed to determine how a technology‐assisted caregiver matching service designed with user input could address diverse caregiver needs.MethodsFor this Phase I project, 32 caregivers of PwD (31% B/AA) participated in semi‐structured focus groups and completed surveys to provide input regarding characteristics deemed valuable in someone they would choose to be connected with for emotional support. Through an iterative process as new information emerged, a web‐based prototype and matching algorithm were developed.ResultsAge and sex distribution were similar between B/AA and W/EA (71 and 68 yrs; 90% and 86%, respectively). W/EA were most likely caring for a spouse/significant other (73%) whereas B/AA were caring for spouse/significant other (30%), a parent (30%;18% W/EA), a sibling (10%; 0% W/EA), or other (30%; 9%W/EA). Level of emotional support was rated “poor” (50% B/AA, 18% W/EA); “average” (0% B/AA, 14% W/EA); “good” (40% B/AA, 41% W/EA); and “excellent” (10%, 27% W/EA). Characteristics B/AA deemed “very important” or “absolutely essential” for a supportive match included living in close proximity, same ethnicity, similar lifestyle, and common values. Alternatively, W/EA selected similar age, living in close proximity, same sex, similar lifestyle, common values and interests, having the same caregiving relationship, and having the same diagnosis in their PwD (see chart).ConclusionIn this cohort, B/AA reported poorer levels of emotional support than W/EA. B/AA were equally likely to be supporting a spouse/significant other as a parent or other acquaintance, whereas W/EA provided support primarily for a spouse/significant other. Characteristics B/AA and W/EA consider important in a supportive caregiver match show important differences that should be considered when optimizing caregiving resources. Phase II will explore further in a much larger sample.