Vemuri, Prashanthi

AbstractBackgroundWe have previously shown that 3D T1‐weighted and 3D T2‐FLAIR brain MRI can potentially be re‐identified using face recognition, but this has not been tested for other MRI sequences commonly used in imaging studies of aging and dementia. Here we compare match rates of automated face recognition to re‐identify 3D T1‐weighted, 3D T2‐FLAIR, 3D T2‐weighted, 2D Axial T2‐FLAIR, multi‐echo GRE (T2*), diffusion MRI, functional MRI, ASL, and T2* GRE images.MethodWe used a dataset of 182 Mayo Clinic participants each with MRI and face photographs. MRIs used Siemens and GE vendor‐product sequences similar to ADNI3 and ADNI4 protocols. We created face reconstructions (“basic”, with minimal preprocessing, and “advanced” that automatically filled missing face regions using a template) from each MRI sequence, and we trained a Microsoft Azure PersonGroup face recognition classifier to recognize these MRI‐based faces. We then queried the classifier with five face photographs for each participant, and we recorded how often the classifier chose the correct MRI as the top‐ranked match. For image types with match rates > = 10%, we then repeated the experiment after de‐facing each MRI with mri_reface, our leading software that replaces faces in each image (“re‐faces”) with an average face.ResultResults are presented in Table 1. 3D T2‐FLAIR, 3D T1‐weighted, and 3D T2‐weighted images were matched at 96‐98%, and mri_reface reduced all to 8%. Axial T2‐FLAIR and ME‐GRE were matched at 32‐45%, and mri_reface reduced both to 1%. T2*‐GRE matched at 10%, and mri_reface reduced this to 1%. ASL matched at 8%, while dMRI and fMRI matched at only 0‐2%.ConclusionAmong current‐generation vendor‐product sequences, we recommend that de‐facing be applied before research data sharing of T1‐weighted, T2‐weighted, T2‐FLAIR, T2*, and ME‐GRE images. Minimal match rates for current‐generation product fMRI, ASL, and fMRI images suggest that they present low risk of re‐identification and can be shared without de‐facing, but this conclusion should be re‐evaluated if they are acquired without fat‐suppression, with a larger field of view, or if newer developments reduce the current levels of artifacts and distortion around the face.

AbstractBackgroundSmall vessel disease (SVD) is a common vascular contributor to cognitive impairment and dementia. In this work, we evaluated and compared non‐imaging measures that can predict variability in SVD related white matter (WM) damage in a population‐based sample.MethodWe identified 752 participants in the population‐based sample of Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (≥50 years of age), who had at least 2 diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) scans and white matter hyperintensity (WMH) assessments along with baseline demographics, systemic vascular health, lifestyle, motor impairment, behavioral symptoms, and plasma markers (Summarized in Figure 1). We computed the WM markers of SVD: fractional anisotropy of genu of the corpus callosum (Genu‐FA) representative of early WM changes, WMH representative of late WM changes, and Vascular WM score (combination of Genu‐FA and WMH). Using all available data, we fit linear mixed effect models and evaluated predictors of WM markers by considering each category of features independently (with demographics) as well as by combining all categories of featuresResultPlasma, gait, systemic vascular, and life‐style measures were significant predictors of all three WM markers of SVD (Figure 2). The predictors of early and late WM slightly differed such that there were no additional significant contributions from behavioral and plasma measures to Genu‐FA. In the final composite models shown in Table 1, higher gait speed, lower number of cardiovascular and metabolic conditions (CMC) and lower Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale scores were associated with better Genu‐FA whereas higher CMC, Beck Anxiety Inventory scores (BAI), and glial acidic protein (GFAP) levels were associated with higher burden of WMH.ConclusionOur observations evaluated the non‐imaging markers of greater WM damage that are relevant to vascular contributions to cognitive impairment to dementia (VCID). We found that in addition to higher vascular risk, worse plasma GFAP, gait measures, and BAI scores were predictors of greater WM damage. Some non‐imaging markers were more associated with early WM changes and others with late WM changes.

AbstractBackgroundNeurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) measures from diffusion MRI provide information about tissue microstructure. Our goal was to compare the sensitivity of NODDI to structural MRI (sMRI) in capturing neurodegenerative changes in the gray matter due to aging and dementia.MethodWe included 815 participants [644 cognitively unimpaired (CU), 103 MCI, 68 AD] from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA) and Mayo ADRC with sMRI and multi‐shell diffusion MRI. We assessed gray matter volumes scaled by head size and cortical thicknesses from sMRI and neurite density index (NDI) and isotropic volume fraction (ISOVF) from NODDI. Pairwise Spearman correlations were calculated between imaging measures and Tau‐PET SUVRs in Braak I‐II, III‐IV, and V‐VI regions of interest (ROI) in participants ≥ 60 years. Separate multivariable linear regression models were fit for the prediction of brain age using sMRI and NODDI in 515 CU participants. The predicted age gaps were calculated as chronological age minus predicted age in the remaining participants. We compared age gaps computed by sMRI and NODDI using disease surrogates (APOE4 genotype, AD pathologies via PET, WMH via FLAIR‐MRI, vascular risk, cognition via MMSE).ResultBraak ROIs, sMRI, and NODDI measures were correlated. The correlations between ISOVF and Tau‐PET SUVRs were stronger than correlations between NDI, volume, and thickness and Tau‐PET SUVR (Fig.1). MMSE was more associated with ISOVF than Tau‐PET and other imaging measures. The sMRI regression models had a higher mean absolute error (MAE) of 4.13 years than NODDI models with an MAE of 4.02 years. The NODDI model better predicted age gap separation between CU, MCI, and AD compared to the sMRI model (Fig.2). The NODDI predicted age gap showed stronger correlations with global amyloid‐PET SUVR, meta‐ROI Tau‐PET SUVR, CMC, APOE4, and MMSE (Fig. 3).ConclusionNODDI, especially ISOVF, had stronger correlations with MMSE and Tau‐PET SUVRs across all Braak ROIs. The brain age prediction model trained using NODDI was more sensitive in detecting neurodegeneration changes than sMRI based on associations with disease surrogates. Our work suggests that NODDI in gray matter may be a more sensitive surrogate of neurodegeneration compared to sMRI.

AbstractBackgroundCognitive decline with aging and neurodegeneration is caused by various neurobiological processes at molecular, cellular, and organ levels. Advanced imaging techniques that detect tissue microstructural alterations may predict cognitive decline earlier than atrophy measures. Tissue‐level mechanical properties are thought to primarily reflect the rigidity and tension of extracellular matrix‐cytoskeleton matrix (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586‐019‐1516‐5) and can be measured noninvasively by Magnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE) (https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7569924). These properties are sensitive to pathophysiological processes that characterize neurological disease including dementias. This study examines the role of medial temporal lobe stiffness in predicting global cognitive decline in participants along the Alzheimer’s disease spectrum.MethodSeventy‐five participants underwent MRE, MRI, amyloid PET imaging, and cognitive assessments with informed consent, and the study was approved by the Mayo Clinic IRB. MRE stiffness maps were calculated by neural network inversion, and medial temporal (MT) stiffness extracted (https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.29226https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2023.103328). White matter hyperintensity (WMH) load, average cortical thickness of AD signature regions, PiB‐PET standardized uptake ratio (PiB‐SUVr), and global cognition z‐scores were each computed (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2020.09.005). Linear mixed effect models were used to assess the effects of MT‐stiffness and its interaction with follow‐up time on global cognition. The additional effects of cortical thickness, WMH, and PiB‐SUVr, and their interactions with cognition follow‐up time were evaluated.ResultTable 1 summarizes results from three mixed effect models. MT‐stiffness and its interaction with time were significant predictors in models 1 (MT‐stiffness only) and 2 (MT‐stiffness+cortical thickness). In model 3 (MT‐stiffness+cortical thickness+PiB‐ratio+WMH), MT‐stiffness alone did not reach significance (P= 0.058), but its interaction with time was a significant predictor. Fig.1 shows global cognition z‐scores with age. Figs. 2A,2B, and 2C show global cognition prediction trajectories. These results suggest that softer MT‐stiffness predicts faster cognitive decline. MT‐stiffness was a significant predictor of cognitive score even when controlling for other biomarkers such as cortical thickness, PiB‐SUVr, and WMH. These results indicate that stiffness measurements can add predictive value regarding cognitive decline in addition to atrophy and amyloidosis.ConclusionBrain mechanical alterations capture microstructural changes that may aid in understanding disease progression and provide information about future cognitive decline in elderly participants along the Alzheimer’s disease continuum.

AbstractBackgroundAutomated face recognition can potentially re‐identify de‐identified research brain MRI, PET, and CT, and direct differences of brain measurements from original and de‐faced images are statistically significant but very minor, i.e. below scan‐rescan differences. Their effects on analyses correlating brain imaging biomarkers with clinical variables remain unknown.MethodWe sampled 3 age‐and‐sex‐matched groups (CU, MCI, and clinical AD) from Mayo Clinic aging studies, each with 61 participants with same‐visit 3D T1‐weighted and 3D T2‐FLAIR MRI, PiB amyloid PET, and Flortaucipir tau PET (total n = 183). We automatically measured hippocampal volume, PIB global SUVR, and tau temporal meta‐ROI SUVR using a) our in‐house pipeline with SPM12, MCALT, and ANTs, and b) FreeSurfer 7.3.2 (PETSurfer), and we measured voxels associated with clinical group separation using SPM12. We also measured WMH from FLAIR using a) our in‐house pipeline, b) Lesion Segmentation Tool (LST), and c) FreeSurfer’s Samseg. For each measurement, we calculated pair‐wise group separation AUC values and Spearman’s rho with age and CDR‐SOB. We then de‐faced all PET and MRI using mri_reface, our top‐performing automated de‐facing software that replaces imaged faces with an average face (“re‐facing”), and we repeated all measurements and analyses with de‐faced images. We then compared the magnitudes of clinical correlations with original images and those of de‐faced images.ResultAnalyses of original and de‐faced images had very high agreement. Only 2/55 paired comparisons were significant (Tables 1‐2): FreeSurfer‐measured global PIB SUVR from de‐faced images was more correlated with age (rho 0.003 vs ‐0.227, p = 0.046), and Mayo‐measured WMH volume from original images was more correlated with CDR‐SOB (rho 0.321 vs 0.308, p = 0.020). Another comparison‐pair tested p = 0.041 for an AUC change +0.008, which we consider not practically meaningful. All others had p>0.05. In voxel‐based analyses of CU vs AD participants, all comparisons were qualitatively similar between original and de‐faced variants (Figure 1).ConclusionDe‐facing PET and MRI using mri_reface did not significantly affect 53/55 correlations between imaging and clinical variables; of the two affected, one became stronger with re‐faced images. Stronger correlations with clinical variables may be explained by de‐facing’s standardizing face voxels and artifacts that irrelevantly affect brain segmentations.

AbstractBackgroundPositron emission tomography (PET) imaging with [18F]flortaucipir allows for in‐vivo visualization of aggregated tau in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The FDA‐approved label for [18F]flortaucipir PET provides a standardized, clinically applicable definition of tau‐PET positivity by visual interpretation. Here, we studied the concordance between this visual interpretation and quantitative approaches employed in research.MethodWe included 2692 participants (cognitively unimpaired [CU] and impaired [CI, MCI or AD dementia]) from four cohorts (Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and ADRC, ADNI, A4, and A05) with available [18F]flortaucipir PET (mean age: 70.2 y, 50.0% females). Three trained readers assessed each [18F]flortaucipir PET scan according to the FDA‐approved method. Visual reads were compared to an established approach for defining tau‐PET positivity based on SUVR values in a temporal meta‐ROI (Jack, et al. Alzheimers Dement. 2017). Previously defined “lenient” (SUVR = 1.22) and “conservative” (SUVR = 1.30) cut‐points were explored. In addition, visual reads were compared to tau‐PET positivity as defined by a scheme based on the expected spatial progression of tau pathology from the medial temporal lobe (MTL) to the temporal neocortex (NEO) (Ossenkoppele, et al. Nat Med. 2022; cut‐points: SUVRMTL = 1.30, SUVRNEO = 1.37).ResultConcordance between visual and quantitative approaches was limited (Figure 1): the “lenient” and MTL‐NEO methods yielded high rates of quantitative‐positive, visual‐negative scans (73‐52% and 26‐18% for CU and CI, respectively), while the “conservative” cut‐point failed to detect 45% and 13% of the CU and CI visual‐positive scans, respectively. The prevalence of tau‐PET positivity in Aβ‐negative individuals was highest with the “lenient” cut‐point (∼24%) and lowest with visual interpretation (∼3%) (Figure 2). Visual‐positive, quantitative‐negative individuals were more frequently Aβ‐positive than visual‐negative, quantitative‐positive individuals (“lenient”: 86% vs 50%, p<0.001; “conservative”: 87% vs 58%, p<0.001; MTL‐NEO: 85% vs 70%, p = 0.005). Among visually‐positive participants, 164 (28%) showed a tau deposition pattern that deviated from the expected MTL to NEO progression (Figure 3).ConclusionVisual and quantitative methods for [18F]flortaucipir PET are non‐exchangeable. Tau‐PET positivity based on visual interpretation aligns better with Aβ‐pathology. A significant number of visually‐positive participants showed a pattern of tau accumulation that deviated from the expected stereotypical spatial progression and was not detected by standard quantitative methods.

AbstractBackgroundA key focus of the U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is recruitment of unimpaired older individuals at risk for cognitive decline with heterogeneous characteristics (under‐represented racial and ethnicity groups (URG), family history of cognitive decline, hypertension, geographic diversity), and a subset of individuals undergo PET and MRI.MethodTo examine effects of heterogeneity on relationships between risk factors, AD biomarkers (Aβ and entorhinal tau PET, hippocampal volume (HV)) and cognition (global, executive function, and memory) were examined from U.S. POINTER neuroimaging participants (N = 602, about 65% of the anticipated total sample) and a subset of Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative participants (N = 503). Neuroimaging data were processed and analyzed using harmonized methods across studies. Some cohort‐specific measurements were standardized using a within‐cohort reference group (Aβ‐negative individuals <70yrs and with global CDR = 0).ResultU.S. POINTER imaging participants are younger than those in ADNI (68.6+/‐5.0yrs vs 70.7+/‐4.4yrs), more likely to be female (65% vs 58%) and from URG (27% vs 15%), and had lower education (14.7+/‐3.3yrs vs 16.7+/‐2.3yrs) and higher Framingham Cardiovascular Risk scores (9.9+/‐8.3 vs 7.7+/‐5.3). The groups differed on several AD biomarkers and cognitive measures (Table). In regression models, AD biomarkers were stronger predictors of cognitive performance in ADNI compared to POINTER. Specifically, Aβ+ individuals with elevated tau had disproportionately poorer cognitive performance in ADNI, and this relationship remained consistent across cognitive measures (Figure). Conversely, demographic/risk variables were stronger predictors in POINTER. Demographic/risk predictors (age, sex, education, race, and FRS) together explained twice as much variance in global cognition in POINTER compared to ADNI (Adjusted R2 = 29% vs 14%). The addition of AD biomarkers to the model further increased the amount of variance in global cognition explained from 14% to 34% in ADNI, but addition of AD biomarkers did not increase variance explained in the POINTER model.ConclusionHeterogeneity among study participants appears to influence baseline biomarker‐cognition relationships such that AD biomarkers explain more variability in cognitive performance in ADNI than POINTER. These findings further suggest that cohort characteristics may affect the potential influence of amyloid‐ and tau‐modifying treatments on cognition.

AbstractBackgroundLarge neuroimaging studies like ADNI‐4 now include T1‐weighted, T2‐weighted and FLAIR images at isotropic1mm resolution for investigation of both neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular disease. These three input types allow segmentation of GM, WM, DeepGM, WMH, and CSF compartments. Additionally, this supports automated assessment of enlarged perivascular spaces (PVS). Our objective was to propose a unified framework for segmentation of intracranial classes and PVS while reducing human effort.MethodsFLAIR and T2‐weighted images are aligned to the T1‐weighted image.. Standard SPM12 unified segmentation using all three input images establishes deformations between subject and template space and bias field corrections. Extended tissue priors including deep GM are deformed into subject space. Adding mean intensities from high probability deep GM voxels as seeds and using the extended prior set, segmentation is re‐started, refining model parameters, deformations and bias‐field estimates. The procedure repeats, adding a WMH channel, resulting in a segmentation including GM, WM, CSF, deep GM, WMH and nuisance classes. Frangi filters are applied to the T1‐ and T2‐ weighted images. Filter response images are smoothed, averaged, masked and inserted in place of the CSF prior. Probability maps of vessel‐like shapes with CSF‐like contrast are estimated to identify PVS. Visual grading was also performed for comparison.ResultsThe method was applied to 300 participants. Visual quality control found two instances of poor WMH over‐segmentation. Perivascular space maps were all visually reasonable. Standard segmentation classes were visibly superior to single T1‐based segmentation. Figures 1,2 present examples. Pearson correlations of PVS fractional volume with multiple human raters’ PVS counts in CSO/CR was over 0.7 in a subset of 125 participants (Figure 3).ConclusionModern dementia protocols include high‐resolution T1‐weighted, T2‐weighted, and FLAIR images that can be used together as inputs to extend probabilistic segmentation adding deep grey and WMH classes with automated PVS assessment.

AbstractBackgroundCo‐morbid Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology in the form of amyloid‐β plaques and tau neurofibrillary tangles are frequently observed in people with probable dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). Neurite Orientation Dispersion and Density Imaging (NODDI) is an emerging technique to characterize white matter (WM) tissue microstructure, although NODDI alterations and associations with AD biomarkers remain undefined in DLB. The objectives of this study are to compare NODDI and DTI parameters between DLB and controls and (ii) evaluate the pattern of DTI and NODDI changes associated with amyloid and tau deposition.MethodConsecutive patients within the DLB spectrum (n = 45), including probable DLB (n = 32) and probable Mild Cognitive Impairment with Lewy bodies (MCI‐LB) (n = 13) from the Mayo Clinic ADRC underwent multi‐shell diffusion MRI, [18F]‐Flortaucipir and [11C]‐PiB PET. A comparison group of 45 age‐ and gender‐matched clinically unimpaired controls (CU) was included. Voxelwise non‐parametric permutation models were used to determine pair‐wise group differences and assess the associations of AD biomarkers with fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), tissue‐weighted neurite density index (tNDI; NDI x (1 – Free water fraction)) and orientation dispersion index (ODI), controlling for age. Complementary analyses were performed using regions‐of‐interest (ROI) obtained from the JHU atlas.ResultCompared to CU, the DLB spectrum group exhibited widespread decreases in FA and tNDI and increases in MD and ODI, with the most pronounced effects in the cingulum bundles, uncinate, inferior and superior longitudinal fasciculi (Fig. 1). Greater [18F]‐Flortaucipir uptake was also associated with lower FA and tNDI, and higher MD and ODI in the DLB spectrum compared to CU, independently of age and [11C]‐PiB uptake (Fig. 2). In contrast, no associations were found between [11C]‐PiB uptake and any of the DTI or NODDI parameters. Complementary ROI analyses corroborated these findings.ConclusionWidespread loss of WM integrity was observed on DTI and NODDI in probable DLB and prodromal DLB. These findings were associated with greater cortical tau, but not with amyloid‐β deposition. Although alpha‐synuclein pathology underlies the loss of WM integrity in DLB, amyloid‐independent tau pathology may also be an important influence on white matter integrity within the DLB spectrum.

AbstractBackgroundWe aimed to assess axonal integrity in MAPT mutation carriers and early white matter (WM) neurodegeneration in asymptomatic carriers using traditional diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) measurements, i.e., fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD), and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI).MethodWe included available multi‐shell diffusion MRI data from 21 MAPT mutation carriers (16 asymptomatic; 5 symptomatic) and 31 non‐carrier family members as controls from the ALLFTD consortium. We used linear mixed‐effect models to assess WM abnormalities measured with FA and MD, neurite density index (NDI) and orientation dispersion index (ODI), combined across hemispheres. Separate models were conducted in all MAPT mutation carriers relative to controls while accounting for relatedness and age, then in symptomatic and asymptomatic carriers relative to controls. ComBat was used to harmonize data across sites.ResultIn models contrasting all MAPT carriers versus controls, WM alterations involved the cingulum bundle (FA, ODI), fronto‐temporal, entorhinal (FA, MD, NDI), and the inferior temporal WM (FA) after correcting for multiple comparisons (Fig. 1). In models contrasting symptomatic and asymptomatic MAPT carriers versus controls, symptomatic carriers had widespread involvement of the fronto‐temporal WM including the cingulum (FA, ODI), entorhinal (MD, FA, NDI), amygdala (MD, NDI) and inferior temporal (FA) areas after correcting for multiple comparisons. Asymptomatic carriers showed higher entorhinal MD and lower inferior temporal and cingulum FA relative to controls, and a more widespread pattern of higher ODI involved the medial temporal, superior temporal and occipital WM as well as long association and projection fibers including the internal capsule, cingulate bundle and fronto‐occipital fasciculi, although they were not statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons.ConclusionTraditional DTI and novel NODDI measurements revealed some extent of overlap as well as divergences in patterns of WM abnormalities, indicating axonal loss is a feature of neurodegeneration in MAPT mutation carriers. Our results suggest that traditional DTI and novel NODDI measurements may have different sensitivities to WM alterations in MAPT mutation carriers, and that axon‐based metrics, particularly ODI measurements, may be more sensitive to the early WM involvement during the asymptomatic stage of the disease.