Eloyan, Ani

AbstractBackgroundThe Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer Disease study (LEADS) aims to robustly characterize biomarkers of early‐onset AD (EOAD). Here we quantified white matter hyperintensities (WMH) in EOAD and compared the volume of WMH with that of cognitively normal (CN) and amyloid‐negative early‐onset dementia (EOnonAD) groups.MethodsWe compared WMH of 194 amyloid‐positive EOAD, 59 amyloid‐negative EOnonAD, and 88 cognitively normal participants. WMH in left and right frontal, temporal, parietal, and occipital regions was compared between the group, as well as the sum total in each hemisphere. For distributional considerations, the logarithm of the WMHs was used in the analyses. Group comparisons were performed using t‐tests. Analyses of variance were used to compare the groups after correcting for the effects of age, sex, and education. Linear regression analyses were used to investigate the association between cognitive impairment and WMH using age, sex, and education as covariates. Cognitive impairment was measured using the Mini‐Mental State Exam (MMSE) and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale sum of boxes (CDR‐sb). All p‐values were corrected for multiple comparisons using the false discovery rate method.ResultsEOAD showed greater WMH compared with both CN and EOnonAD groups across all regions. This relationship holds after correcting for the effects of age, sex, and education (see Figure 1 and Table 1, all p‐values < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between WMHs of CN and EOnonAD groups. Higher WMH values were associated with greater cognitive impairment: MMSE (b = ‐1.69, p‐value <0.0001) and CDR‐sb (b = 0.45, p‐value <0.0001).ConclusionsEOAD consistently show higher WMH compared to their CN and EOnonAD peers. The extent of WMH in CN and EOnonAD groups is similar. No differences in regional distribution were observed, with EOAD having higher WMH across all brain regions. Higher WMHs were associated with worse cognitive impairment measured both using MMSE and CDR sum of boxes.

AbstractIntroductionWe examined neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) and psychotropic medication use in a large sample of individuals with early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD; onset 40‐64 years) at the midway point of data collection for the Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS).MethodsBaseline NPS (Neuropsychiatric Inventory – Questionnaire; Geriatric Depression Scale) and psychotropic medication use from 282 participants enrolled in LEADS were compared across diagnostic groups – amyloid‐positive EOAD (n = 212) and amyloid negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer's disease (EOnonAD; n = 70).ResultsAffective behaviors were the most common NPS in EOAD at similar frequencies to EOnonAD. Tension and impulse control behaviors were more common in EOnonAD. A minority of participants were using psychotropic medications, and use was higher in EOnonAD.DiscussionOverall NPS burden and psychotropic medication use were higher in EOnonAD than EOAD participants. Future research will investigate moderators and etiological drivers of NPS, and NPS differences in EOAD versus late‐onset AD.

AbstractObjectiveThe Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS) seeks to provide comprehensive understanding of early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD; onset <65 years), with the current study profiling baseline clinical, cognitive, biomarker, and genetic characteristics of the cohort nearing the data‐collection mid‐point.MethodsData from 371 LEADS participants were compared based on diagnostic group classification (cognitively normal [n = 89], amyloid‐positive EOAD [n = 212], and amyloid‐negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer's disease [EOnonAD; n = 70]).ResultsCognitive performance was worse for EOAD than other groups, and EOAD participants were apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 homozygotes at higher rates. An amnestic presentation was common among impaired participants (81%), with several clinical phenotypes present. LEADS participants generally consented at high rates to optional trial procedures.ConclusionsWe present the most comprehensive baseline characterization of sporadic EOAD in the United States to date. EOAD presents with widespread cognitive impairment within and across clinical phenotypes, with differences in APOE ε4 allele carrier status appearing to be relevant.HIGHLIGHTS Findings represent the most comprehensive baseline characterization of sporadic early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) to date. Cognitive impairment was widespread for EOAD participants and more severe than other groups. EOAD participants were homozygous apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 carriers at higher rates than the EOnonAD group. Amnestic presentation predominated in EOAD and EOnonAD participants, but other clinical phenotypes were present.

AbstractOBJECTIVEInvestigation of learning slopes in early‐onset dementias has been limited. The current study aimed to highlight the sensitivity of learning slopes to discriminate disease severity in cognitively normal participants and those diagnosed with early‐onset dementia with and without β‐amyloid positivityMETHODData from 310 participants in the Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (aged 41 to 65) were used to calculate learning slope metrics. Learning slopes among diagnostic groups were compared, and the relationships of slopes with standard memory measures were determinedRESULTSWorse learning slopes were associated with more severe disease states, even after controlling for demographics, total learning, and cognitive severity. A particular metric—the learning ratio (LR)—outperformed other learning slope calculations across analysesCONCLUSIONSLearning slopes appear to be sensitive to early‐onset dementias, even when controlling for the effect of total learning and cognitive severity. The LR may be the learning measure of choice for such analyses.Highlights Learning is impaired in amyloid‐positive EOAD, beyond cognitive severity scores alone. Amyloid‐positive EOAD participants perform worse on learning slopes than amyloid‐negative participants. Learning ratio appears to be the learning metric of choice for EOAD participants.

AbstractBackgroundPreviously, we found that female sex is associated with greater pathology burden in early‐onset Alzheimer’s disease (EOAD) in the Longitudinal EOAD Study (LEADS). Here, we have expanded our analyses by adding APOE‐ε4 carrier status as a further predictor of EOAD pathologic burden.MethodWe included 180 EOAD LEADS participants with available APOE genotype, Flortaucipir PET, Florbetaben PET, and MRI data. Demographic and biomarker differences were analyzed using ANOVA. EOAD participants were split by sex and APOE‐ε4 carrier status. Box plots were created in R and a voxel‐wise multiple linear regression in SPM12 yielded statistical brain maps of gray matter density (GMD), amyloid and tau burden.ResultCompared to males, EOAD females showed significantly greater global amyloid uptake (mean SUVR, p=0.002) and greater tau SUVR in the MetaROI, Braak 3&4 and 5&6 regions (p=0.0007, p=0.001, p=0.01, resp., Table 1). Female APOE‐ε4 carriers showed greater tau SUVR in Braak regions 1&2 than female non‐carriers (p<0.01, Figure 2B). Male APOE‐ε4 carriers showed trend‐level thinner entorhinal cortex than male non‐carriers (p=0.06, Figure 1). Interestingly however, femaleAPOE‐ε4 non‐carriers showed greater global amyloid SUVR than female carriers (p<0.01, Figure 2A). Further, APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers showed significantly thinner medial temporal cortices than carriers in both sexes (M, p<0.05; F, p<0.01). Male APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers also showed significantly lower mean cortical thickness than male carriers (p<0.05, Figure 1). Female APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers showed trend‐level lower mean cortical thickness than female carriers (p=0.06, Figure 1). The FWE corrected SPM12 maps showed significantly greater GM atrophy in the right temporal lobe and greater amyloid burden in a right lateralized occipitoparietal pattern in female APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers compared to female carriers. Further, male APOE‐ε4 non‐carriers showed greater tau uptake in the left frontal lobe than male carriers (Figure 3).ConclusionThese results suggest that APOE‐ε4 non‐carrier status is associated with greater atrophy, amyloid and tau deposition in EOAD. This might be due to the presence of other strong genetic drivers of disease pathology in EOAD.

AbstractBackgroundThe overarching goal of the Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer Disease study (LEADS) is to optimally characterize early‐onset AD (EOAD) and establish an EOAD clinical trials network. Here we report the baseline demographic and imaging biomarker comparisons of the LEADS cohort to late‐onset AD (LOAD) subjects from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI3).Method123 amyloid‐positive EOAD, 47 amyloid‐negative EOnonAD, 60 cognitively normal young controls were compared to 130 amyloid‐positive LOAD, 110 amyloid‐negative LOnonAD and 286 amyloid‐negative cognitively normal older controls. To account for the effect of cognitive aging between EO and LO populations, each cognitive measure was Z‐transformed. Cortical and hippocampal atrophy were quantified using W‐scores adjusted for age, sex and total intracranial volume. Z‐scores and W‐scores were compared using t‐test or Wilcoxson rank test as appropriate. All p‐values were corrected for multiple comparisons using the false discovery rate correction.ResultEOAD showed greater pathology burden and greater cortical atrophy (AD signature) relative to LOAD. EOAD also showed greater cognitive impairment across all cognitive tests. EOAD showed greater functional impairment, more depression but less neuropsychiatric behaviors overall compared to LOAD (Table 1 and Figure 1, all ps<0.05). Repeating the analyses stratified by cognitive stage (MCI/dementia) or CDR global rating (0.5/1) did not result in any major differences.EOnonAD differed from LOnonAD by also showing greater impairment on all cognitive and functional measures There were no significant differences in amyloid and tau burden, or atrophy W‐scores between these groups. EOnonAD were more depressed and showed more functional impairment compared to LOnonAD (Table 2 and Figure 2, all ps<0.05). Repeating the analyses split by cognitive stage (MCI/dementia) or CDR global rating (0.5/1) did not result in any major differences.ConclusionConsistent with our preexisting hypotheses, EOAD and EOnonAD perform much worse relative to their LO counterparts. EOAD also show greater pathological burden as expected. The reported analyses were done in chronological rather than disease time (time since disease onset). Benchmarking individuals along the disease spectrum might prove to be a better strategy especially when conducting analyses on rate of disease progression.

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.

AbstractPatients with early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) are commonly excluded from large‐scale observational and therapeutic studies due to their young age, atypical presentation, or absence of pathogenic mutations. The goals of the Longitudinal EOAD Study (LEADS) are to (1) define the clinical, imaging, and fluid biomarker characteristics of EOAD; (2) develop sensitive cognitive and biomarker measures for future clinical and research use; and (3) establish a trial‐ready network. LEADS will follow 400 amyloid beta (Aβ)‐positive EOAD, 200 Aβ‐negative EOnonAD that meet National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association (NIA‐AA) criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or AD dementia, and 100 age‐matched controls. Participants will undergo clinical and cognitive assessments, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), [18F]Florbetaben and [18F]Flortaucipir positron emission tomography (PET), lumbar puncture, and blood draw for DNA, RNA, plasma, serum and peripheral blood mononuclear cells, and post‐mortem assessment. To develop more effective AD treatments, scientists need to understand the genetic, biological, and clinical processes involved in EOAD. LEADS will develop a public resource that will enable future planning and implementation of EOAD clinical trials.

AbstractBackgroundPrevious research has suggested that, compared to males, females are at greater risk for and have greater pathology burden in late onset. However, sex differences in early onset AD (EOAD) have not yet been studied.MethodWe included 167 participants [28 cognitively normal (CN, 68% females), 98 early onset AD (EOAD, 55% females), and 41 cognitively impaired amyloid‐negative (EOnonAD, 31% females] subjects from the Longitudinal Early‐Onset AD Study (LEADS) with available Flortaucipir PET, Florbetaben PET, and MRI data. Multiple linear regression (MLR) models including age and MMSE as covariates were used in the pooled sample to examine the effects of sex on hippocampal and white matter hyperintensity volume, mean cortical thickness, mean tau distribution by Braak regions and mean cortical amyloid SUVR. We also ran voxelwise MLR with sex as the predictor and cortical thickness, amyloid SUVR normalized to whole cerebellum, tau SUVR normalized to cerebellar crus, respectively, as the outcome measures while controlling for age, MMSE, and total intracranial volume (MRI only). Results are displayed at a cluster‐level FWE correction of p<0.05.ResultThere were no significant demographic differences between males and females in any diagnostic group. Across the pooled sample females showed significantly greater atrophy of the hippocampus (p=0.0001), greater tau SUVR in Braak regions 3&4 (p=0.05) and 5&6 (p=0.04) and trend for greater global amyloid uptake (p=0.074) (Table 2). The analyses in imaging space confirmed these findings and showed that the effects are driven by the EOAD group. Females showed greater amyloid deposition globally and greater tau deposition in the frontal, inferior parietal and temporal lobes (Figure 3).ConclusionFemale sex is associated with greater pathology burden in EOAD. Longitudinal studies will be needed to establish whether such difference translates in faster rates of progression in women relative to men.

AbstractBackgroundApproximately 5% of the 5.6 million (∼280,000) Americans with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) develop symptoms at age 65 or younger and are classified as having early‐onset AD (EOAD). Although EOAD and late‐onset AD (LOAD) share the same pathologic substrate, there are notable differences in their clinical and biological phenotypes. The Longitudinal Early‐onset AD study (LEADS) is a multi‐site, observational clinical and biomarker study of EOAD. In the present study we utilized the currently available LEADS imaging data to explore the spatial extent and magnitude of neurodegeneration EOADMethod95 amyloid positive patients with EOAD, 37 amyloid negative cognitively impaired patients (EOnonAD) , and 55 cognitively unimpaired controls (CNs) were included in the analysis. The magnitude of cortical thinning in the EOAD and EOnonAD groups was estimated using whole‐brain GLMs compared to the CN group. In addition, w‐scores were derived for each EOAD patient for these ROIs: average cortical thickness, hippocampal volume, AD‐signature cortical thickness (typically used in LOAD), and precuneus cortical thickness controlling for age, sex, and acquisition site. The utility of each ROI to differentiate EOAD patients from CNs was assessed by calculating the percentage of patients falling below a W‐threshold of ‐1.5.ResultIn EOAD, a distributed pattern of cortical thinning was observed in lateral temporal, parietal, and frontal cortex (p<.01), and was most prominent in the precuneus (Cohen’s d’ = 1.5). In the EOnonAD group, cortical thinning was observed but was highly variable across individuals. The w‐score analysis in the EOAD group yielded the following results: Mean Cortical thickness: Mean = ‐3.34, SD = 2.97, Classification = 72%.; Hippocampal volume: Mean = ‐2.96, SD = 2.39, Classification = 74%; AD Signature: Mean = ‐4.63, SD = 3.07, Classification = 80%; Precuneus: Mean = ‐5.98, SD = 4.1, Classification = 90%.ConclusionOur results are consistent with previous findings demonstrating cortical thinning in lateral parietal, precuneus, and lateral temporal lobes in EOAD with relatively less involvement of the medial temporal lobes. Our results also suggest that the precuneus may be especially vulnerable to neurodegeneration in patients with EOAD and may serve as a useful biomarker for patient classification.