Citations

Background Sinonasal mucosal melanoma has poor survival despite multimodality treatment. While the impact of immunotherapy (IT) on metastatic cutaneous melanoma is well-defined, there are relatively little data on sinonasal mucosal melanoma. Objective We sought to define immunotherapy outcomes in patients with sinonasal mucosal melanoma. Methods A retrospective cohort study evaluated patients treated with IT during their overall treatment strategy for SNMM. Patient demographics, treatment, and survival outcomes were recorded. Results 52 patients had IT treatment for SNMM from 2000 to 2022, with an average age of 69.1 ± 11.9 years. The most common treatment was surgery with radiation and IT ( n = 26, 50%). Most regimens consisted of a combination of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab ( n = 17, 32.7%) or pembrolizumab ( n = 14, 26.9%). 44.2% of patients experienced reported complications. Overall survival at 1-, 2-, and 5 years was 86.9%, 74.1%, and 39.1%, respectively. Conclusion Approximately half of patients will have a local response following immunotherapy, but it is rare to have improvement at metastatic locations. Further research within our group will assess optimal timing and markers that are predictive of response.

AbstractBackgroundLarge‐scale studies comparing sporadic early‐onset AD (EOAD, age<65) and late‐onset AD (LOAD, age = 65) are lacking. We compared amyloid‐PET outcomes (positivity rate and amyloid burden) between patients clinically diagnosed with sporadic EOAD vs LOAD, leveraging data from the Longitudinal Early‐Onset AD Study (LEADS) and the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 3 (ADNI3).Method731 patients meeting the 2011 NIA‐AA criteria for AD dementia or MCI were included (505 early‐onset from LEADS, 226 late‐onset from ADNI3, Table 1). All participants underwent amyloid‐PET with [18F]Florbetaben or [18F]Florbetapir. Amyloid positivity was centrally determined by a process involving a visual read by a trained expert and PET‐only quantification; in case of a discrepancy, a read from an independent physician acted as a tiebreaker. Logistic regressions in each cohort examined relations between amyloid positivity and age, sex, MMSE and APOE4 genotype. Amyloid burden was independently quantified in Centiloids using an MRI‐based pipeline. Mean Centiloids in LEADS and ADNI were compared with two‐way ANOVA, for visually positive and visually negative scans.ResultAmyloid positivity rate was higher in LEADS (76%) than ADNI (64%, p<0.001, Figure 1A). Lower MMSE and APOE4 genotype increased odds of amyloid positivity in both cohorts, although the APOE4 effect was stronger in ADNI than LEADS (OR = 10.1 versus 2.4, p = 0.007, Table 2). Amyloid positivity was more common in females across cohorts, but this effect was only statistically significant in LEADS (Table 2). Centiloids were bimodally distributed in both cohorts, although the separation between positive and negative scans was more prominent in LEADS (Figure 1B). Visually positive scans had significantly higher Centiloids in LEADS than in ADNI, whereas no cohort difference was observed for visually negative scans (Figure 1C). Sensitivity analyses showed that this effect was driven by patients with MCI (CDR = 0.5; Figure 1D‐E).ConclusionThe lower amyloid positivity rate in ADNI might be due to AD‐mimicking pathologies being more common at an older age. The higher amyloid burden in early‐onset, amyloid‐positive patients could reflect younger patients being diagnosed later in the disease course compared to typical, late‐onset patients. Alternatively, younger patients might tolerate higher neuropathology burden due to higher brain reserve or fewer co‐pathologies.

AbstractBackgroundDiagnosing sporadic early‐onset AD (EOAD, age‐at‐onset<65) is challenging: in the multi‐center Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer’s Disease Study, ∼25% of patients with clinically diagnosed EOAD are amyloid‐PET‐negative. Here we used FDG‐PET to characterize the heterogeneity of hypometabolic profiles in these patients and better identify underlying etiologies.MethodSeventy‐four amyloid‐PET‐negative patients with clinical diagnosis of sporadic EOAD (MCI or mild dementia stage) underwent FDG‐PET. Patients were classified as having normal or hypometabolic FDG‐PET based on a data‐driven approach that compared each patient to a group of 61 age‐matched amyloid‐PET‐negative controls using 12 methodological combinations (3 reference regions, 2 voxel‐level thresholds, 2 outlier detection methods). We then assessed clinical and demographic differences between patients with normal versus hypometabolic FDG‐PET, and further compared groups using independent biomarkers of neurodegeneration (structural MRI and fluid biomarkers). Finally, we applied hierarchical clustering to hypometabolic FDG‐PET scans to identify patterns of hypometabolism.ResultThirty‐six amyloid‐negative patients (49%) had hypometabolic FDG‐PET scans. They were older and more severely impaired across most cognitive domains than patients with normal FDG‐PET (Table 1). They also had reduced hippocampal volumes and cortical thickness (Figure 1A), higher plasma and CSF neurofilament light chain (NfL) levels, and elevated plasma GFAP compared to patients with normal FDG‐PET (Figure 1B). In contrast, the latter, who had intermediate cognitive scores between hypometabolic patients and controls, had MRI and fluid biomarker levels in the range of controls (Figure 1). In hypometabolic patients, hierarchical clustering identified four profiles: i) anterior temporal extending to temporo‐parietal and frontal regions (n = 5), ii) anterior temporal and orbitofrontal (n = 11), iii) occipito‐parietal (n = 6), and iv) lateral frontal and parietal (n = 14) (Figure 2). Genetic testing identified two patients with Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (FTLD)‐associated pathogenic variants, both considered hypometabolic and assigned to the first (MAPT) and second (c9orf72) metabolic profiles.ConclusionFifty‐one percent of amyloid‐negative patients had normal FDG‐PET: they had milder clinical impairment, normal MRI measures, and normal NfL values, suggesting non‐neurodegenerative etiologies. Patients with abnormal FDG showed heterogeneous hypometabolic patterns suggestive of multiple etiologies including Lewy body disease, FTLD or corticobasal degeneration. Longitudinal follow‐up to autopsy will ultimately clarify the amyloid‐negative clinical mimics of sporadic EOAD.

AbstractBackgroundResearch subjects can potentially be re‐identified from de‐identified MRI, CT, and PET brain scans with up to 98% accuracy using Microsoft Azure’s cloud‐based commercial facial recognition software. This showed the need to “de‐face” publicly shared research brain scans. Subsequently, Microsoft has begun restricting its face recognition services, intending to prevent misuse. This study tests a variety of popular open‐source computer vision and facial recognition software packages to measure the re‐identification risk with only unrestricted free software.MethodThis study used brain MRI from Siemens 3T scanners and face photographs from 182 participants (ages 30‐90+) in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging. Each participant had photos taken with an iPad, which were cropped loosely around the head and converted to black and white. A total of 81 renders (2D reconstruction images; Figure 1) were made from each 3D T2‐FLAIR MRI, simulating various camera and lighting positions. These face renders approximate black and white photos, allowing use with software packages developed for matching faces/features between photographs. Open‐source Python packages (OpenCV, DeepFace, face_recognition, scikit‐learn) and their included pre‐trained models (designed for photographs) were used to match participant photographs to the labelled library of MRI‐based face renders. A correct match was recorded when the top‐scoring render or set of renders automatically chosen by the algorithm was from the MRI of the correct participant.ResultFeature matching with ORB and SWIFT (both from OpenCV) produced no correct matches, despite a prior publication reporting moderate success. The best match rates (Figure 2) were 58‐59% accuracy using face_recognition or DeepFace packages with support vector machines (SVMs). Without SVMs, these packages performed modestly worse (51%‐55%).ConclusionWhile the highest match rates obtained by widely available open‐source packages (roughly 60%) are much lower than those of a limited‐access commercial product (Microsoft Azure, with 98%), they show that actors with only access to no‐cost readily available software could still re‐identify a research subject from a brain scan most of the time. This further highlights the need for image refacing software, such as mri_reface, to protect the privacy and identifies of research volunteers.

AbstractBackgroundSeveral programs are available for automatically “de‐facing” brain images. These are designed to prevent the potential use of face imagery to re‐identify research participants. Previous works have compared available software and mri_reface is frequently among the top methods. The “Minimally Invasive DeFacing of MRI images” (MiDeFace) program was more recently added to FreeSurfer, but minimal validation of MiDeFace has been published.MethodWe ran mri_reface 0.3.3 and MiDeFace 7.3.2 on two datasets: A) 207 participants with face photographs and 3D T1‐weighted and 3D T2‐weighted‐FLAIR MRI from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (all unimpaired, Siemens); and B) 300 participants from ADNI3 with 3D T1‐weighted MRI (50 unimpaired + 50 with clinical AD, from each of 3 vendors). For dataset A, we tested the rate at which Microsoft Azure face recognition matched each participant’s photographs with the correct MRI, comparing unmodified images, those from mri_reface, and those from MiDeFace. For dataset B, we compared measured regional brain volume and cortical thickness from original vs. de‐faced images with SPM12, FreeSurfer 7.4.1, and the FSL‐UK Biobank pipeline. For both datasets, images were visually rated to assess removal of the face and retention of brain tissue.ResultAutomated face recognition match rates were lower with mri_reface (17/207 8.2%) than with MiDeFace (24/207 11.6%), indicating stronger identity protection with mri_reface, but both were greatly reduced vs. unmodified images (203/207 98.1%). Example images with both programs are shown in Figure 1. From visual ratings (Table 1), rates of complete success (modification of the entire face while retaining the entire brain) were much higher with mri_reface, but the great majority of failures from MiDeFace were subtle and occurred in relatively less recognizable face regions. The effects of both programs on downstream imaging measurements (Figure 2) were small and very comparable, but MiDeFace was favored mildly for SPM12 and for FSL, while mri_reface was more favored for FreeSurfer.ConclusionAltogether, mri_reface more reliably removed the complete face, leading to smaller rates of potential re‐identification (8.2% vs 11.6%). Effects on downstream image measurements were small and comparable with both methods.

AbstractBackgroundThe Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA) is a longitudinal, population‐based study of residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, USA. MCSA is releasing de‐identified clinical and imaging data on GAAIN.org to benefit the research community.MethodWe included longitudinal clinical data from all participants of the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging 30‐90 years of age (average 70.0y) through the first 15 years of the study. Clinical data includes age, sex, self‐reported race/ethnicity, APoE4 allele status, cognitive impairment status (normal, MCI, dementia, or other), height, weight, blood pressure, multi‐domain neuropsychological scores, neuroimaging summary measurements, medications, cardiovascular risk factors, social activity, sleep, mood/anxiety, functional measures, and more. For our initial release of imaging data, we selected the first imaging timepoint acquired on 3T GE MRI scanners and amyloid (PiB) PET during the same visit, from all available imaging participants 50‐90 years of age (average 70.7y). Currently, we included 3D T1‐weighted (MPRAGE) MRI (1x1x1.2mm3), T2‐weighted FLAIR MRI (0.85x0.85x3.6mm3), diffusion MRI (2.7mm resolution with 41 directions at b=1000 and 5 b=0), and numeric cortical global SUVR and Centiloid values from PiB PET scans at 40‐60 minutes post‐injection. All images are released in DICOM format and thoroughly de‐identified using CTP while ensuring preservation of necessary fields for analyses. T1‐weighted and T2‐FLAIR MRI were also de‐faced (identifiable face imagery was removed and replaced with an average) using mri_reface version 0.3.3 to further protect participants’ privacy, and all de‐faced images were visually inspected by a trained data scientist for quality assurance.ResultThe first phase of our public data release includes clinical data from 5925 unique participants from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA), each ranging from 1‐12 visits at roughly 15‐month intervals, and three MRI sequences (T1‐w, T2‐w‐FLAIR, and diffusion) from 1802 unique participants. Demographic summaries are given in Table 1.ConclusionThis large, richly characterized, de‐identified clinical and imaging dataset is available to the research community at https://www.gaaindata.org/partner/MCSA, and it is suitable for a wide range of research uses. Additional data will be released over time, including de‐faced amyloid PET images.

AbstractBackgroundThere is a strong link between tau and progression of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), necessitating an understanding of tau spreading mechanisms. Prior research, predominantly in typical AD, suggested that tau propagates from epicenters (regions with earliest tau) to functionally connected regions. However, given the constrained spatial heterogeneity of tau in typical AD, validating this connectivity‐based tau spreading model in AD variants with distinct tau deposition patterns is crucial.MethodWe included 269 amyloid‐ß‐positive (PET/CSF) individuals with clinically diagnosed atypical AD (113 posterior cortical atrophy, PCA‐AD; 83 logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia, lvPPA‐AD; 33 behavioural variant AD, bvAD; 40 corticobasal syndrome, CBS‐AD) and 68 with typical AD from 12 international cohorts, who underwent tau‐PET (54% [18F]AV1451/[18F]flortaucipir/Tauvid, 27% [18F]MK6240, 19% [18F]PI2620). Using Gaussian mixture modeling including amyloid‐ß‐negative controls, cross‐sectional tau‐PET standardized uptake value ratios within Schaefer‐200 atlas regions were transformed to tau positivity probabilities. Tau epicenters were defined as the 5% regions with highest tau positivity probabilities. For each variant, the association between functional connectivity‐based distance (using the 30% strongest positive region‐to‐region connections of a group‐average connectivity matrix from ADNI elderly controls) and tau‐PET covariance (group‐average correlation per region pair) was assessed through linear regression, adjusting for age, sex, site, and Euclidean distance. Regions were categorized based on functional proximity to the epicenter (quartiles 1‐4) and tau positivity probabilities were assessed accordingly.ResultTau positivity probabilities matched clinical variants, with a posterior pattern in PCA‐AD, left‐hemispheric dominant pattern in lvPPA‐AD, widespread pattern in bvAD, sensorimotor cortex involvement in CBS‐AD, and temporo‐parietal predominance in typical AD (Fig.1). In line with this, tau epicenters were highly heterogeneous across variants (Fig.1). In all variants, greater tau‐PET covariance was associated with shorter functional connectivity‐based distance (Fig.2). We observed that regions in closer functional proximity to the epicenter exhibited higher tau positivity probabilities than regions functionally further away (p<0.05, Fig.3).ConclusionThis multi‐center study shows that the brain’s functional architecture serves as a universal predictor of tau spreading in AD. Since tau is a key driver of neurodegeneration and cognitive decline in AD, this finding holds potential for personalized medicine and defining participant‐specific endpoints in clinical trials.

AbstractBackgroundPhase four of the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI4) began in 2023. This time‐period corresponded to MRI vendors introducing product sequences with compressed sensing (CS), cross‐vendor adoption of arterial spin‐labelling (ASL) and multi‐band slice excitation, and hardware improvements (head‐coils, increased gradient amplitudes). These advances enabled the acquisition of new imaging measures and reduced scan times. The ADNI4 MRI protocol aims to maintain longitudinal consistency across two decades of data acquisition, while adopting new technologies. Here we describe the design and justification behind the ADNI4 protocol and list the target imaging biomarkers.MethodsThe ADNI4 MRI protocol includes 9 MRI sequences; i) T1‐weighted (T1w) MP‐RAGE, ii) a compressed sensing T1w MP‐RAGE, iii) 3D T2w FLAIR, iv) structural isotropic 3D T2w v) T2*‐weighted susceptibility imaging vi) multi‐post labelling delay (PLD) 3D ASL, vii) 2D multi‐band‐multiple‐shell diffusion (dMRI), viii) 2D multi‐band EPI BOLD ix) high resolution, limited field of view, imaging centered on the hippocampus. Table 1 gives a detailed summary of the key protocol parameters and lists some of the imaging biomarkers that can be obtained from each series.ResultsStructural imaging was kept consistent across imaging sites. Variations in vendor specific sequences, software upgrades, and hardware performance capabilities, resulted in variations in advanced imaging strategies. Table 2 highlights the advanced sequences introduced in ADNI4, which will gradually be implemented as the required upgrades and licenses are obtained at each site. The main advanced sequences that are new in ADNI4 from ADNI 3 are i) CS for T1w images, ii) pseudo‐continuous‐ASL (pCASL) being implemented on all 3 vendors (GE, Siemens, Philips), iii) multi‐PLD ASL, which allows for the generation of quantitative maps of cerebral blood‐flow (CBF) and arterial transit times (ATTs), iv) and isotropic 1mm3 resolution for 3D FLAIR. When ADNI4 began, product sequences that utilized artificial intelligence were not widely available and could not be adequately tested before the rollout of ADNI4.ConclusionsThe ADNI4 database will continue to help the neuroimaging community, not only extract valuable imaging biomarkers, but provide the data necessary to test the impact of advanced imaging strategies on diagnostic accuracy and disease sensitivity.

AbstractBackgroundWomen with suspected coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) may be at higher risk of experiencing cognitive decline due to cerebral small vessel disease, a known contributor to Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD). A potential underlying mechanism that could accelerate this cognitive decline is the accumulation of brain tissue iron, which has been previously linked to changes in brain function potentially caused by oxidative stress and cell death. Therefore, we aim to elucidate whether a similar mechanism could affect women with suspected CMD by investigating the potential role of iron deposition on the brain’s functional organization and its effect on cognition using advanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Material and MethodsTwenty‐seven women with suspected CMD [Age; median (range) = 54 (29‐76)], drawn from ongoing cohorts (3R01HL146158‐04S1,3U54AG065141‐04S1), underwent a 3T MRI protocol, including submillimeter T2* 3‐dimensional echo‐planar‐imaging for assessing iron deposition with high‐resolution quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) and resting‐state fMRI (rs‐fMRI). Iron content was quantified by total‐generalized‐variation based QSM analysis. Functional integrity was determined via graph theoretical approach (i.e., nodal degree). Cognitive assessment was also performed using the NIH Toolbox. Mediation analysis was conducted using Python Statsmodels.ResultsMost of the women with suspected CMD showed lower performance in processing speed, working memory, executive function, and attention (Figure‐1A). We found a significant association between elevated iron levels in paracentral gyrus and lower functional connectivity in left hippocampus (p = 0.005, adjusted‐r2 = 0.19) (Figure‐1B). Elevated iron level in the paracentral gyrus showed an impact on cognitive performance in the domains of executive function and attention (p<0.0001, coefficient = 531.09) as well as language functions and crystalized abilities (p = 0.036, coefficient = 362.45), mediated by functional connectivity in the left hippocampus (indirect effect on executive function / language: p = 0.034 / 0.038, coefficient = ‐254.54 /‐ 213.06) (Figure‐1C).ConclusionsOur results suggest that changes in hippocampal functional organization are associated with cortical iron deposition and mediate its impact on cognitive performances. These changes may increase the risk of cognitive decline/ADRD or in women with suspected CMD. Future research in a larger cohort with a longitudinal design is necessary to validate and expand upon these findings.