Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N.

AbstractBackgroundStandardizing tau pathology quantification in vivo is challenged by differences in binding characteristics between tau‐PET tracers. The HEAD study aims to generate a leading, longitudinal head‐to‐head dataset of MK‐6240, Flortaucipir, RO948, and PI‐2620 tau‐PET to harmonize these tracers' outcomes and develop tools allowing for the generalization of findings across large studies and trials. Here, we present current advancements in building the HEAD study cohort and dataset.MethodsThe HEAD study is managed at the University of Pittsburgh. HEAD comprises several sites across the US and Canada in which 620 subjects (young, cognitively unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease (AD)) will undergo tau‐PET with at least two tracers, amyloid‐PET with PiB or NAV4694, MRI, blood collection, and standardized neuropsychological testing at baseline and at 18‐month follow‐up. PET and MRI acquisition parameters are based on ADNI4 protocols and neuropsychological testing employs the NACC Uniform Data Set. The National Centralized Repository for AD serves as the biorepository for blood samples and the Laboratory of Neuroimaging provides a centralized database for imaging and neuropsychological archiving. PET data is reconstructed to maximize cross‐scanner harmonization and is processed uniformly similarly to ADNI4 PET.ResultsIn one year of active enrollment (Jan 2023‐Jan 2024), 362 participants were enrolled at six active sites; over 80% of participants completed neuropsychological testing and MRI, and over 70% completed Flortaucipir, MK‐6240, and amyloid‐PET, with a mean tau‐PET acquisition window of 29.1 days. RO948 and PI‐2620 tau‐PET are additionally acquired in a subset currently including 41 participants (Fig.1). Current HEAD cohort demographics including age, sex, underrepresented populations, and group distributions, APOEe4 carrier status, and amyloid positivity are shown in Fig.2. A case of a subject with AD with all 4 tau‐PET tracers acquired head‐to‐head within 49 days is shown in Fig.3.ConclusionThe HEAD study represents a continued effort in the optimization of AD imaging biomarkers. Baseline data collection is projected to be completed in 2024; results being generated by multiple groups from this dataset will provide novel and crucial guidance on the use of tau‐PET tracers in research, clinical trials, and prospectively in clinical practice.

AbstractBackgroundUtilizing PET amyloid‐beta (Aß) and tau for staging Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) has demonstrated potential in identifying individuals with varying degrees of disease severity, applicable to both clinical trials and practice. However, the diverse binding characteristics of tau tracers pose challenges to the application of this staging across different ligands. In this study, we evaluate a novel staging framework proposed by the AA working group, employing Aß PET and either [18F]MK6240 or [18F]Flortaucipir in individuals participating in a head‐to‐head study of tau PET tracers. This will provide insights into the robustness of this framework when applied across different tau ligands.MethodWe evaluated 154 people (89 CU and 65 CI), with MK6240, Flortaucipir, Aß‐PET, MRI. SUVRs used inferior cerebellar gray as reference. Participants were categorized in Aß positivity(A), using visual read, and tau positivity (T) in medial temporal lobe(MTL) and neocortex(NEO). Tau MTL(TMTL) and NEO positivity were defined as average +3 SD of youngs. NEO moderate(TMOD) and high(THIGH) was defined as below and above median SUVR of NEO‐positive individuals. Individuals were grouped as: A‐T‐, A+T‐, A+TMTL+(early), A+TMOD+(intermediary), and A+THIGH+(advanced).ResultsWe found that the distribution of the number of individuals across the five AD stages was comparable when using both MK6240 and Flortaucipir tracers (Figure 1). However, upon examining the concordance within each group, we found a low concordance of 30% (3/10) between tracers in the early tau stage (A+TMTL+). Concordance increased in the intermediary stage A+TMOD+, with a rate of 65% (9/14), and further increased to 79% (11/14) in the advanced stage (A+THIGH+). The A+T‐ group exhibited the highest concordance between tracer results, at 95% (21/22).ConclusionOur findings indicate that the application of this framework across different populations using different tau tracers can lead to a compatible distribution among groups. However, in a direct comparison, we noted that this did not necessarily result in high concordance between groups, as group shifts were observed that depended on the cutoffs used (data not shown). These results emphasize the necessity for harmonization of tau PET tracers prior to their utilization for stage determination.

AbstractBackgroundDifferences between on‐ and off‐target retention characteristics between [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir (FTP) complicate the harmonization across tracers. Our objective here was to separate the impact of the reference region by evaluating correlations between [18F]MK6240 (MK) and [18F]FTP standard uptake values (SUVs).MethodParticipants (Figure 1, n=90) received an amyloid‐β (Aβ) PET scan ([11C]PIB or [18F]NAV4694) and two tau‐PET scans: [18F]MK (90‐110 minutes post‐injection) and [18F]FTP (80‐100 minutes post‐injection). For all PET scans, the individual frames were realigned, averaged, and co‐registered to a Freesurfer 7.1‐segmented T1‐MPRAGE. SUVs were calculated in the reference region (inferior cerebellar gray), on‐target regions (entorhinal cortex, hippocampus, Braak III, Braak IV, Braak V, Braak VI) and off‐target regions (caudate, pallidum, putamen, thalamus, cerebellar white matter, choroid plexus, meninges, eroded white matter). We examined correlations between [18F]MK and [18F]FTP SUV values as a function of Aβ status, as well as their associations with age.ResultAll correlations (Figure 2) were significant at p<0.001. The interaction with Aβ status was significant for hippocampus, BraakIII‐V and the metatemporal region. In Aβ+ participants, [18F]FTP and [18F]MK6240 have similar SUVs in on‐target regions with a slope close to 1 except for in hippocampus and Braak VI. However, [18F]FTP SUVs, on average, were greater than [18F]MK SUVs in Aβ+ and Aβ‐ subjects in the reference region and all off‐target regions except for meninges, and in Aβ‐ subjects in the on‐target regions. Age correlated with [18F]FTP SUVs in Aβ‐ subjects in all regions (except the reference region, Braak VI and meninges) and [18F]MK SUVs in putamen and pallidum, but this correlation was only significant (p<0.01) when young and old subjects were included.ConclusionDespite [18F]MK’s higher affinity for tau and SUVR dynamic range being twice that of [18F]FTP, the SUVs in on‐target regions are similar. The higher [18F]FTP signal in the reference region appears to be the contributing factor to the lower dynamic range. The higher [18F]FTP signal in on‐target regions for Aβ‐ subjects may reflect the presence of off‐target signals in these subjects. Taking off‐target signals into account should improve correlations between the two tracers, especially when measuring the earliest deposition of tau.

AbstractBackgroundTau‐PET tracers allow for in vivo Braak staging of individuals in the Alzheimer’s disease (AD) continuum. The impact of tracers’ characteristics for Braak staging using tau‐PET remains unclear. Therefore, we performed a head‐to‐head comparison of Braak staging using first‐ and second‐generation tau‐PET tracers.MethodWe assessed 51 cognitively unimpaired (CU) and 49 cognitively impaired participants (mean [SD] age 69.4 [7.5] years) with at least two tau‐PET ligands ([18F]MK6240, [18F]AV1451, and/or [18F]RO948) at McGill University, as part of the HEAD study. We calculated standardized uptake value ratios (SUVR) in Braak‐like regions of interest (ROI) for each ligand and investigated their association using Spearman’s correlation. Thresholds defined the presence of tauopathy in each Braak ROI, which was used to assign a Braak stage to each participant. Finally, we assessed the agreement between the Braak staging provided by each tracer, both for the traditional (using separate Braak stages – 0, I, II, III, IV, V, and VI) and simplified (using joint Braak stages – 0, I‐II, III‐IV, and V‐VI) frameworks.ResultIn all Braak ROIs, we found positive correlations between the SUVR values of the three tracers (Fig. 1). The strongest correlation was between [18F]MK6240 and [18F]RO948 in Braak II (r=0.94), and the weakest between [18F]AV1451 and [18F]RO948 in VI (r=0.51). Inter‐tracer agreement regarding the latest stage of abnormality was substantial or nearly perfect between pairs of tracers but moderate between the three tracers (Fig. 2A). The simplified framework presented greater agreement compared to traditional Braak staging, except between [18F]MK6240 and [18F]RO948. At the ROI level, the lowest agreements were observed for Braak II and I‐II, when [18F]MK6240 and [18F]RO948 were compared to [18F]AV1451 (Fig. 2B‐C). [18F]AV1451 had the highest probability of overestimating the Braak stage assigned by [18F]MK6240 and by [18F]RO948, especially at earlier stages (Fig. 3).ConclusionThe ligands presented moderate to nearly perfect agreement for in vivo staging of AD severity. Off‐target binding of [18F]AV1451 to the choroid plexus might explain disagreements at early stages. Overall, slight improvements in agreements were achieved with the simplified framework, as observed in histopathological staging.

AbstractBackgroundThe newly proposed criteria by the AA working group incorporates both biological and clinical stages to characterize the progression of AD. In this study, we aim to evaluate the agreement between these two complementary systems.MethodsUsing 188 participants from McGill TRIAD and 139 from the HEAD cohorts, we categorized participants into biological (0‐4) and clinical (0‐4) stages using amyloid PET, tau PET(MK‐6240), and clinical measures as described by the working group. Participants were then stratified into three categories: congruent (clinical = biological), higher in the biological stage (clinical < biological), and higher in the clinical stage (clinical > biological). In the TRIAD cohort, we further compared these groups for age, sex, years of education, vascular burden (WMH), microglial activation (PBR scan), Astrocyte reactivity (GFAP), amyloid load, tau load, and NPI‐Q scores using Welch two‐sided t‐test with FDR multiple comparison correction.ResultsIn the TRIAD cohort, 34% of participants were congruent, 24.5% had a higher clinical stage, and 41.5% had a higher biological stage. Meanwhile in the HEAD cohort 68.2% were congruent, 20.7% had a higher clinical stage, and 17% had a higher biological stage. TRIAD participants with a higher clinical stage had lower education (P = 0.02), more neuropsychiatric symptoms (P = 0.03), and a higher vascular burden (P = 0.03) (Table 1). As expected, people with higher biological stage had more amyloid(P<0.001), tau(P<0.001), and astrocyte reactivity(P<0.001) (Table 1, Figure 2).ConclusionsOur findings highlight important discordance between clinical and biological stages, which could be partially explained by cognitive reserve. This was supported by the protective effects of educational attainment in participants with a higher biological stage. Vascular burden played a major role in the cognitive impairment of individuals with higher clinical stages. Future studies should replicate these findings in larger more representative population‐based cohorts.

AbstractBackgroundRecent studies showed that neuroinflammation plays a key role in triggering specific neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS), such as irritability and agitation, in individuals with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). While prior studies showed an association between tau pathology and all NPS domains, the extent to which tau influences each specific NPS domain remains unclear. Here, we aim to investigate the association of tau and NPS domains in the AD continuum. We hypothesize that tau plays a comparatively greater effect on the emergence of psychotic symptoms compared to other NPS domains.MethodWe assessed 56 individuals (21 cognitively unimpaired (CU), 23 MCI, and 12 AD dementia) from the HEAD study who underwent clinical assessments with the Neuropsychiatry Inventory Questionnaire (NPI‐Q) and had positron emission tomography (PET) for amyloid‐β (Aβ) ([18F]AZD4694 or [11C]PiB), and tau tangles ([18F]MK6240) at the same visit. We selected individuals with an NPI‐Q total score ≥1. Tau SUVR values were tailored with a mask from Braak stages I‐VI, using the inferior cerebellar gray matter as reference region. Leave‐one‐out voxel wise and linear regression tested the association between each NPI‐Q domain and biomarkers accounting for age, sex, cognitive status, and study site.ResultCI individuals had significantly higher NPI‐Q score and Braak VI PET SUVR than CU individuals (Table 1). NPI‐Q score was significantly associated with tau‐PET in the periRolandic and supplementary motor cortex (Figures 1A). Linear regression showed that NPI‐Q associates with tau‐PET in the Braak stage VI (Figure 1B). Leave‐one‐out regression analysis revealed that delusions, motor disturbances, and anxiety contributed most to the association between tau‐PET and NPS (Figure 2A, C). These domains presented a higher magnitude of association compared to each other NPI‐Q domain (Figure 2B). Notably, irritability, agitation, and disinhibition exerted a negative effect to the association, emphasizing that tau may not play a role in the development of these symptoms (Figure 2A, D)ConclusionOur study supports previous evidence suggesting that irritability and agitation may not be triggered by tau, but rather by other pathological process such as neuroinflammation. These findings provide additional rationale for the therapeutics aiming to mitigate irritability and agitation in AD patients.

Abstract Approximately 5% of Alzheimer’s disease patients develop symptoms before age 65 (early-onset Alzheimer’s disease), with either sporadic (sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease) or dominantly inherited (dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease) presentations. Both sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease and dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease are characterized by brain amyloid-β accumulation, tau tangles, hypometabolism and neurodegeneration, but differences in topography and magnitude of these pathological changes are not fully elucidated. In this study, we directly compared patterns of amyloid-β plaque deposition and glucose hypometabolism in sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease and dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease individuals. Our analysis included 134 symptomatic sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease amyloid-Positron Emission Tomography (PET)-positive cases from the University of California, San Francisco, Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center (mean ± SD age 59.7 ± 5.6 years), 89 symptomatic dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease cases (age 45.8 ± 9.3 years) and 102 cognitively unimpaired non-mutation carriers from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network study (age 44.9 ± 9.2). Each group underwent clinical and cognitive examinations, 11C-labelled Pittsburgh Compound B-PET and structural MRI. 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET was also available for most participants. Positron Emission Tomography scans from both studies were uniformly processed to obtain a standardized uptake value ratio (PIB50–70 cerebellar grey reference and FDG30–60 pons reference) images. Statistical analyses included pairwise global and voxelwise group comparisons and group-independent component analyses. Analyses were performed also adjusting for covariates including age, sex, Mini-Mental State Examination, apolipoprotein ε4 status and average composite cortical of standardized uptake value ratio. Compared with dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease, sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease participants were older at age of onset (mean ± SD, 54.8 ± 8.2 versus 41.9 ± 8.2, Cohen’s d = 1.91), with more years of education (16.4 ± 2.8 versus 13.5 ± 3.2, d = 1) and more likely to be apolipoprotein ε4 carriers (54.6% ε4 versus 28.1%, Cramer’s V = 0.26), but similar Mini-Mental State Examination (20.6 ± 6.1 versus 21.2 ± 7.4, d = 0.08). Sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease had higher global cortical Pittsburgh Compound B-PET binding (mean ± SD standardized uptake value ratio, 1.92 ± 0.29 versus 1.58 ± 0.44, d = 0.96) and greater global cortical 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-PET hypometabolism (mean ± SD standardized uptake value ratio, 1.32 ± 0.1 versus 1.39 ± 0.19, d = 0.48) compared with dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease. Fully adjusted comparisons demonstrated relatively higher Pittsburgh Compound B-PET standardized uptake value ratio in the medial occipital, thalami, basal ganglia and medial/dorsal frontal regions in dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease versus sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease. Sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease showed relatively greater 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-PET hypometabolism in Alzheimer’s disease signature temporoparietal regions and caudate nuclei, whereas dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease showed relatively greater hypometabolism in frontal white matter and pericentral regions. Independent component analyses largely replicated these findings by highlighting common and unique Pittsburgh Compound B-PET and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-PET binding patterns. In summary, our findings suggest both common and distinct patterns of amyloid and glucose hypometabolism in sporadic and dominantly inherited early-onset Alzheimer’s disease.

AbstractBackgroundWe examined neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) and psychotropic medication use at the midway point of data collection of the Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer’s Disease Study (LEADS). We compared amyloid‐positive early‐onset Alzheimer’s disease (EOAD) participants and amyloid‐negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer’s disease [EOnonAD]) participants across NPS domains and psychotropic medication categories.Method282 participants enrolled in LEADS were compared across diagnostic groups – amyloid‐positive EOAD (n = 212) and amyloid‐negative EOnonAD (n = 70). All participants were between ages 40 and 64 at baseline. NPS were measured with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory – Questionnaire (NPI‐Q) and Geriatric Depression Scale – Short Form (GDS‐SF). Medications were categorized into psychotropic category (e.g., antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines). Groups were compared on NPI‐Q using binary logistic regression adjusting for sex and disease severity, on GDS‐SF using linear regression adjusting for sex and disease severity, and on psychotropic medication use using Chi square or Fisher’s exact test.ResultDemographic data are presented in Table 1. Average total NPI‐Q score was higher in EOnonAD than EOAD (p = .002, ŋp 2 = .03). Regardless of diagnostic group, informants endorsed Affective behaviors most frequently (76.2%). EOAD informants endorsed fewer Distress‐Tension behaviors (p = .02, OR = .498) and Impulse Control behaviors (p = .01, OR = .438). EOAD informants also endorsed apathy (p < .001, OR = .316), irritability (p = .02, OR = .498), and disinhibition (p = .04, OR = .476) at lower frequency than EOnonAD. GDS‐SF showed that the EOnonAD participants self‐reported more symptoms of depression than the EOAD group (p = .002, ŋp 2 = .03). (Table 2A). A minority of participants, regardless of diagnostic group, reported psychotropic medication use (35%). There was higher use in EOnonAD (38%) than EOAD (24%) (p = .03, Cohen W = .14) (Table 2B).ConclusionNPS burden and psychotropic medication use were higher in EOnonAD than EOAD participants, despite EOnonAD being less severely impaired. LEADS continues to collect data. Future studies will examine etiologies that may be larger drivers of NPS than AD neuropathology, mediators (e.g., race, ethnicity) in the association between NPS and diagnostic group classication, compare NPS in EOAD vs. LOAD, and examine longitudinal changes in neuropsychiatric profiles.

AbstractBackgroundApproximately 10‐25% of amnestic early‐onset dementia are negative for amyloid (Early‐onset non‐Alzheimer’s Disease, EOnonAD). EOnonAD is a heterogenous group with various etiologies. In order to better understand the traits of EOnonAD, we clustered amnestic EOnonAD individuals according to cognitive patterns.MethodCognitive data of 62 EOnonAD individuals from the Longitudinal Early‐onset AD study (LEADS) were Z‐normalized to 91 intact individuals after adjusting for age, sex, and education. This led to domain‐averaged composite Z‐scores for memory, language, speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function. Cluster analysis using the Ward method on the residuals for the five composites was performed. We used Scree plot using the pseudo T‐squared to determine the optimal number of clusters. We compared demographics, imaging biomarkers (amyloid and tau PET SUVR, hippocampal volume), plasma (pTau231, Aß40, Aß42, glial fibrillary acidic protein, and neurofilament light chain (NfL)), and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (Aß42/40, NfL, Neurogranin, Visinin‐like protein, YKL‐40, and Synaptosome Associated Protein 25) across the clusters after adjusting for age, sex, and education. We compared gray matter density of each EOnonAD cluster to controls (n = 84) using voxel‐wise multiple linear regressions in SPM12, adjusting for age, sex, education, and intracranial volume.ResultScree plot using the pseudo‐T‐squared suggested three clusters. Cluster 1 (38/62, 61.3%) was characterized by having the mildest cognitive impairment in all domains. Cluster 2 (19/62, 30.6%) was characterized by more severe memory and language impairment. Cluster 3 (5/62, 8.1%) was characterized by more severe impairment in speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function (Table 1). Cluster 3 showed significantly higher NfL for both plasma (Cluster 1 vs 3, p<0.001; Cluster 2 vs 3, p < 0.004) and CSF (Cluster 1 vs 3, p = 0.001). Other biomarkers did not show significant difference (Table 1). Only Cluster 3 showed significant atrophy in the bilateral fronto‐parietal areas at p<0.01, uncorrected (Figure 1).ConclusionWe identified heterogeneity in cognitive patterns among amnestic EOnonAD individuals. Cluster 1 had mildest cognitive impairment; Cluster 2 had predominant impairment in memory and language; and Cluster 3 had predominant impairment in speed/attention, visuospatial, and executive function, with significant fronto‐parietal atrophy and high NfL indicating active neurodegeneration.

Abstract Approximately 5% of Alzheimer’s disease cases have an early age at onset (&lt;65 years), with 5–10% of these cases attributed to dominantly inherited mutations and the remainder considered as sporadic. The extent to which dominantly inherited and sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease overlap is unknown. In this study, we explored the clinical, cognitive and biomarker profiles of early-onset Alzheimer’s disease, focusing on commonalities and distinctions between dominantly inherited and sporadic cases. Our analysis included 117 participants with dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease enrolled in the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network and 118 individuals with sporadic early-onset Alzheimer’s disease enrolled at the University of California San Francisco Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center. Baseline differences in clinical and biomarker profiles between both groups were compared using t-tests. Differences in the rates of decline were compared using linear mixed-effects models. Individuals with dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease exhibited an earlier age-at-symptom onset compared with the sporadic group [43.4 (SD ± 8.5) years versus 54.8 (SD ± 5.0) years, respectively, P &lt; 0.001]. Sporadic cases showed a higher frequency of atypical clinical presentations relative to dominantly inherited (56.8% versus 8.5%, respectively) and a higher frequency of APOE-ε4 (50.0% versus 28.2%, P = 0.001). Compared with sporadic early onset, motor manifestations were higher in the dominantly inherited cohort [32.5% versus 16.9% at baseline (P = 0.006) and 46.1% versus 25.4% at last visit (P = 0.001)]. At baseline, the sporadic early-onset group performed worse on category fluency (P &lt; 0.001), Trail Making Test Part B (P &lt; 0.001) and digit span (P &lt; 0.001). Longitudinally, both groups demonstrated similar rates of cognitive and functional decline in the early stages. After 10 years from symptom onset, dominantly inherited participants experienced a greater decline as measured by Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes [3.63 versus 1.82 points (P = 0.035)]. CSF amyloid beta-42 levels were comparable [244 (SD ± 39.3) pg/ml dominantly inherited versus 296 (SD ± 24.8) pg/ml sporadic early onset, P = 0.06]. CSF phosphorylated tau at threonine 181 levels were higher in the dominantly inherited Alzheimer’s disease cohort (87.3 versus 59.7 pg/ml, P = 0.005), but no significant differences were found for t-tau levels (P = 0.35). In summary, sporadic and inherited Alzheimer’s disease differed in baseline profiles; sporadic early onset is best distinguished from dominantly inherited by later age at onset, high frequency of atypical clinical presentations and worse executive performance at baseline. Despite these differences, shared pathways in longitudinal clinical decline and CSF biomarkers suggest potential common therapeutic targets for both populations, offering valuable insights for future research and clinical trial design.