Citations

AbstractBackgroundHippocampal volumetry on magnetic resonance imaging is recognized as an Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarker, and manual segmentation is the gold standard for measurement. However, a standard procedure is lacking. We operationalize and quantitate landmark differences to help a Delphi panel converge on a set of landmarks.MethodsOne hundred percent of anatomic landmark variability across 12 different protocols for manual segmentation was reduced into four segmentation units (the minimum hippocampus, the alveus/fimbria, the tail, and the subiculum), which were segmented on magnetic resonance images by expert raters to estimate reliability and AD‐related atrophy.ResultsIntra‐ and interrater reliability were more than 0.96 and 0.92, respectively, except for the alveus/fimbria, which were 0.86 and 0.77, respectively. Of all AD‐related atrophy, the minimum hippocampus contributed to 67%; tail, 24%; alveus/fimbria, 4%; and the subiculum, 5%.ConclusionsAnatomic landmark variability in available protocols can be reduced to four discrete and measurable segmentation units. Their quantitative assessment will help a Delphi panel to define a set of landmarks for a harmonized protocol.

Objective The newly proposed National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association (NIA‐AA) criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to Alzheimer disease (AD) suggest a combination of clinical features and biomarker measures, but their performance in the community is not known. Methods The Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA) is a population‐based longitudinal study of nondemented subjects in Olmsted County, Minnesota. A sample of 154 MCI subjects from the MCSA was compared to a sample of 58 amnestic MCI subjects from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 1 (ADNI‐1) to assess the applicability of the criteria in both settings and to assess their outcomes. Results Fourteen percent of MCSA and 16% of ADNI‐1 of subjects were biomarker negative. In addition, 14% of MCSA and 12% of ADNI‐1 subjects had evidence for amyloid deposition only, whereas 43% of MCSA and 55% of ADNI‐1 subjects had evidence for amyloid deposition plus neurodegeneration (magnetic resonance imaging atrophy, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography hypometabolism, or both). However, a considerable number of subjects had biomarkers inconsistent with the proposed AD model; for example, 29% of MCSA subjects and 17% of ADNI‐1 subjects had evidence for neurodegeneration without amyloid deposition. These subjects may not be on an AD pathway. Neurodegeneration appears to be a key factor in predicting progression relative to amyloid deposition alone. Interpretation The NIA‐AA criteria apply to most MCI subjects in both the community and clinical trials settings; however, a sizeable proportion of subjects had conflicting biomarkers, which may be very important and need to be explored. Ann Neurol 2013;74:199–208

AbstractBackgroundGenetic variants at the CLU, CR1, and PICALM loci associate with risk for late‐onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) in genomewide association studies. In this study, our aim was to determine whether the LOAD risk variants at these three loci influence memory endophenotypes in black and white subjects.MethodsWe pursued an association study between single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes at the CLU, CR1, and PICALM loci and memory endophenotypes. We assessed black subjects (AA series: 44 with LOAD and 224 control subjects) recruited at Mayo Clinic Florida and whites recruited at Mayo Clinic Minnesota (RS series: 372 with LOAD and 1690 control subjects) and Florida (JS series: 60 with LOAD and 529 control subjects). Single nucleotide polymorphisms at the LOAD risk loci CLU (rs11136000), CR1 (rs6656401, rs3818361), and PICALM (rs3851179) were genotyped and tested for association with Logical Memory immediate recall, Logical Memory delayed recall, Logical Memory percent retention, Visual Reproduction immediate recall, Visual Reproduction delayed recall, and Visual Reproduction percent retention scores from the Wechsler Memory Scale–Revised using multivariable linear regression analysis, adjusting for age at exam, sex, education, and apolipoprotein E ε4 dosage.ResultsWe identified nominally significant or suggestive associations between the LOAD‐risky CR1 variants and worse Logical Memory immediate recall scores in blacks (P = .068–.046, β = −2.7 to −1.2). The LOAD‐protective CLU variant is associated with better logical memory endophenotypes in white subjects (P = .099–.027, β = 0.31–0.93). The CR1 associations persisted when the control subjects from the AA series were assessed separately. The CLU associations appeared to be driven by one of the white series (RS) and were also observed when the control subset from RS was analyzed.ConclusionThese results suggest for the first time that LOAD risk variants at CR1 may influence memory endophenotypes in blacks. In addition, the CLU LOAD‐protective variant may confer enhanced memory in whites. Although these results would not remain significant after stringent corrections for multiple testing, they need to be considered in the context of the LOAD associations with which they have biological consistency. They also provide estimates for effect sizes on memory endophenotypes that could guide future studies. The detection of memory effects for these variants in clinically normal subjects, implies that these LOAD risk loci might modify memory prior to clinical diagnosis of AD.

AbstractWe report the case of a 2.5‐year‐old girl with linear morphea initially diagnosed as an acquired port‐wine stain (PWS). She underwent three treatments to the right face using the pulsed dye laser (PDL) before sclerotic changes were observed and the correct diagnosis was confirmed with histopathology. Treatment using the PDL reduced the skin erythema but did not prevent subsequent sclerosis. The sclerosis became most prominent superior to the patient's right ear in an area not treated using the laser. A review of the English‐language medical literature identified no cases of morphea triggered using a PDL, but there were several reports of early morphea misdiagnosed as an acquired PWS. Briefly, we review those cases, as well as morphea subtypes, and comment on how the pathophysiology of morphea may lend itself to an early underrecognized inflammatory presentation, delaying diagnosis.

Key Points Evidence exists that ELN criteria for response in ET and PV issued in 2009 do not provide relevant measures of benefit for patients. Revised recommendations for assessing response are provided.