Boeve, Bradley F.

AbstractBackgroundMemory impairment is generally considered minimal to absent in those with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). We sought to assess the frequencies of subjective and objective memory impairment in individuals with mild bvFTD according to consensus criteria.MethodAssessments were performed in mildly symptomatic bvFTD [defined by global FTLD Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR®+NACC FTLD) = 1] mutation carriers (Familial) and non‐mutation carriers (Sporadic) who are participants in the ARTFL LEFFTDS Longitudinal Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ALLFTD, www.allftd.org) study. Mutation carriers had a pathogenic mutation in the MAPT, GRN or C9orf72 gene. The presence of subjective memory impairment was defined by a rating >0 on the memory domain of the CDR®+NACC FTLD. Evidence of objective memory impairment was based on performance across 7 memory measures, which include the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set Version 3 – Craft Story Immediate Recall (CSImm) and Delayed Recall (CSDel), Benson Figure Delayed Recall (BenDel), and the California Verbal Learning Test – Learning (CVLearn), Immediate Recall (CVImm), Delayed Recall (CVDel), and Recognition (CVRecog). Performance was considered abnormal for z‐scores ≤ ‐1.5.ResultData from 38 Familial (mean age 60±8 years, 61% male), and 109 Sporadic (mean age 63±7 years, 70% male) participants were analyzed. Memory ratings >0 on the CDR®+NACC FTLD were common for both Familial (84%) and Sporadic (88%). The frequencies of abnormal performance in the Familial vs Sporadic groups, respectively, per memory measure were: CSImm 43.8% vs 45.9%, p = 0.83; CSDel 46.9% vs 52.6%, p = 0.58; BenDel 29.4% vs 46.4%, p = 0.08; CVLearn 54.8% vs 39.8, p = 0.14; CVImm 64.5% vs 50%, p = 0.16, CVDel 80.6% vs 55.1%, p = 0.01, and CVRecog 51.6 vs 49%, p = 0.80. The frequencies of abnormal performance did not differ (all p>0.05) between Familial and Sporadic for ≥2 tests (79.3% vs 67.7%), ≥4 tests (55.2% vs 44.1%) and ≥6 tests (34.5% vs 31.2%).ConclusionThese data suggest that among those with a mild global severity of bvFTD features: 1) subjective and objective memory impairment are relatively frequent, and 2) the frequency of impairment across memory measures is largely similar between familial and sporadic bvFTD. The presence of memory impairment should not preclude a diagnosis of bvFTD.

AbstractBackgroundFrontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a leading cause of dementia in individuals under age 65. Due to limitations in access to in‐person evaluations, there is an urgent need to examine remote, accessible, and low‐burden assessment techniques for FTD. Unobtrusive monitoring of at‐home computer use in older adults has shown that those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have significant declines in computer use over time. To extend these findings, we characterized daily trajectories in smartphone battery percentage, a proxy of smartphone use, and examined relationships with clinical indicators of disease severity in FTD.MethodParticipants included 250 adults enrolled in the ALLFTD Mobile App study (mean age = 53.9 [SD = 14.9]; 59% women; 94% White). To assess clinical disease severity, all participants completed the FTLD Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR®+NACC FTLD), a brief neuropsychological battery, the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI‐Q), and brain MRI. The ALLFTD Mobile App was installed onto participants’ smartphones for remote, passive, continuous monitoring of smartphone use (average days of monitoring = 82 [range = 7‐541]). Battery percentage was collected every 15 minutes. Linear mixed effects models examined linear, quadratic, and cubic effects of time of day (i.e., hour; modeled as person‐specific random effects) and their interactions with each measure of disease severity on battery percentage. Models covaried for age.Result57% of participants were clinically normal, 21% had MCI, and 22% had dementia. CDR®+NACC FTLD Global score interacted with hour such that participants with MCI and dementia had flatter battery curves (i.e., less change in battery percentage throughout the day – a proxy of less smartphone use) than clinically normal participants (ps<0.001). Additional models showed that worse memory (hour3 x memory score: 𝛃 = 0.59, p<0.001) and executive functioning (hour3 x executive score: 𝛃 = 0.64, p<0.001), more neuropsychiatric symptoms (hour3 x NPI‐Q: 𝛃 = ‐0.22, p = 0.004), and smaller gray matter volumes (controlling for intracranial volume; hour3 x volume: 𝛃 = 0.49, p<0.001) were also statistically significantly related to less battery usage throughout the day.ConclusionThese findings are proof‐of‐concept that passively acquired smartphone data, specifically battery usage, can provide insights about disease progression in FTD. Results support future research focusing on the development of passively collected digital metrics sensitive to clinical declines in neurodegenerative disease.

AbstractBackgroundPathological Lewy body disease (LBD) may commonly present clinically as Parkinson’s disease dementia (PDD), Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) or Alzheimer’s disease dementia (ADD). Neuropathological definitions also include a group in which ADD is present, but the postmortem Lewy pathology does not meet threshold density and distribution levels for the neuropathological diagnosis of DLB (ADLB). Little is known about the cognitive profiles of patients with ADLB and despite common underlying pathology, studies delineating neuropsychological profiles in LBD are fraught with inconsistencies. We characterized the longitudinal cognitive trajectories defined by neuropsychological profiles in cases along the pathological spectrum of LBD.MethodCases from the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders (AZSAND) with a cognitive diagnosis of dementia at death and who at minimum, had two neuropsychological evaluations were included. Final neuropathological diagnosis was determined as LBD (neocortical or limbic LB ± AD), ADLB, and AD pathology only. LBD cases were categorized by their cognitive clinical syndromes as PDD and DLB. Global cognition was evaluated using MMSE. Neuropsychological domains of Memory, Executive function, language, attention, and visuospatial were evaluated. Mixed linear methods were used to predict longitudinal change for a given baseline MMSE.Result287 participants and 1874 participant‐years of data were included in this study. LBD (n = 115), and ADLB (52) groups were predominantly male, while AD (n = 114) group was primarily female. Baseline MMSE was similar across all pathologic groups. Linear mixed modelling methods showed faster decrease in memory domain scores (decreasing 0.22 units/year – 0.42 units/year faster, p = 0.01) in ADLB group compared to other groups. Significantly faster decline was noted in LBD and ADLB group in clock drawing (p<0.001), fluency scores (declining 1.02 unit/year faster p<0.001) compared to AD group. There was no difference between PDD and DLB clinical subgroups.ConclusionIn autopsy confirmed cases, ADLB had an accelerated trajectory of decline in memory tasks, while AD, and LBD appeared to have similar trajectories. In contrast, all groups with Lewy bodies progressed faster and showed accelerated decline compared to AD in measures of frontal‐subcortical functions. These results may inform antemortem classification of patients and diagnostic accuracy in these groups.

AbstractBackgroundPathogenic mutations in the MAPT (tau) gene cause familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration (f‐FTLD). No disease‐modifying treatments exist. Tau therapeutics being tested in other tauopathies may be suitable candidates, but the small number of identified mutation carriers prohibits traditional clinical trial designs from achieving adequate power. Platform trial designs permit multiple therapies to be tested in parallel and improve power by sharing placebo groups across treatment arms. We evaluate whether a platform design could improve the likelihood of identifying an effective treatment for MAPT mutation carriers.MethodALLFTD and GENFI observational data were used to simulate MAPT prevention and early symptomatic clinical trials (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD≤1). Only presymptomatic participants (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0) within 2.5 years of expected symptom onset based on disease progression models (DPM) were included. First, we evaluated the time and sample size required to test five treatments using a platform design compared to sequential randomized control trials. Platform designs assumed a max of three treatment arms at any time, with new arms enrolling upon completion of prior arms. Each arm randomized 60 mutations carriers 3:1 treatment to placebo, with a placebo group shared across arms. Minimum follow up was 1.5 years with common close. Sequential trials assumed 90 participants allocated 1:1 treatment to placebo, with three‐month intervals between trials. Using a platform design, we compared a novel method for testing therapeutic effects using DPMs to account for differential rates of expected progression compared to traditional mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM) tests controlling for baseline CDR®+NACC‐FTLD.ResultFive treatments could be tested in a platform design using 300 participants (75% treated) over five years, compared to 450 participants (50% treated) over 13 years using traditional, sequential trials. Platform trial simulations indicated that with 80% power, DPM‐based analytic approach could detect a 25% treatment effect, whereas traditional MMRM could only detect a 40% effect.ConclusionPlatform designs combined with DPM‐based analyses provide a path to testing more treatments with fewer participants. Adequately powered MAPT platform trials are feasible but require a global clinical trial infrastructure.

AbstractBackgroundGiven the rarity of genetic frontotemporal dementia (FTD), researchers across the world have come together to form the FTD Prevention Initiative (FPI) in an effort to improve prevention trials design. As this initiative begins to bring together large‐scale data from worldwide cohort series, including ALLFTD in North America and GENFI in Europe and Canada, it is critical for FPI to quantify the level of relatedness between all participants. Here we provide the most recent update to these ongoing analyses.MethodsGenome‐wide SNP genotyping data from 1,684 ALLFTD and 568 GENFI participants was used to perform lineage analyses using PLINK. Briefly, QC was performed similarly in all datasets to remove individuals with low call rate and filter autosomal SNPs for missingness, frequency, and deviation from Hardy‐Weinberg equilibrium. Genetic ancestry was inferred by projecting genotyped samples into the principal components of the 1000 Genomes reference panel, using R package bigsnpr. Overlapping ALLFTD and GENFI genotyping data was then used, in a two‐stage approach, to calculate pairwise identity‐by‐descent (IBD) estimates and KING coefficients, followed by family‐network identification and pedigree reconstruction using PRIMUS.ResultsFirst, we calculated IBD estimates among all participants by restricting pairs to those with estimates>0.1875 (up to second‐degree relatives). Overall, we identified a total of 292 second‐degree family networks, including 168 ALLFTD and 120 GENFI families, mostly associated with pathogenic variants in the 3 major FTD‐causing genes. We also identified 4 family networks with participants enrolled in both the ALLFTD and GENFI series, as well as several multi‐site families within the ALLFTD consortium. This first, overall approach allowed us to predict close relationships even between individuals with different ancestral backgrounds, including at least 4 confirmed admixed families. More distant relationships were also detected within ALLFTD and GENFI by performing ancestry‐based analysis among participants with estimated European ancestry, using the KING‐robust algorithm.ConclusionsThese lineage analyses allowed us to identify, otherwise unknown, close (and distant) relatives from different study sites, as well as within the ALLFTD and GENFI series. This dataset will be a crucial resource to increase statistical accuracy and power in upcoming collaborative FPI studies.

AbstractBackgroundThe ALLFTD Consortium aims to characterize preclinical and prodromal stage of familial Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (f‐FTLD) to prepare for clinical trials in FTLD.MethodWe prospectively followed 320 asymptomatic participants of the ALLFTD Consortium who are family members of f‐FTLD with a mutation in MAPT (n = 106), GRN (n = 74), or C9orf72 (n = 140), and describe the ratings on the eight domains of CDR® plus NACC FTLD (FTLD‐CDR) in those who phenoconverted to Mild Behavioral and/or Cognitive Impairment (MBCI). MBCI was diagnosed by the proposed research criteria for MBCI‐FTD (Barker MS, et al. Brain 2022). Participants who were diagnosed as MBCI but returned to asymptomatic at the following visit were excluded from the FTLD‐CDR assessment. ANOVA was used to compare continuous variables, and chi‐square test was used to compare categorical variables across the groups.ResultThirty‐six participants (15 MAPT, 9 GRN, 12 C9orf72) developed MBCI during follow‐up visits, 13 participants (5 MAPT, 3 GRN, 5 C9orf72) were diagnosed as MBCI but were characterized as asymptomatic at the following visit, and 271 participants stayed asymptomatic. Percentage of male in MBCI participants was 50% (MAPT 60%, GRN 33%, C9orf72 50%, p = 0.45). Age at phenoconversion to MBCI was 53.6±13.0 years old, the youngest in MAPT and the oldest in GRN participants (MAPT 44.3±8.3, GRN 63.1±11.3, C9orf72 56.4±10.8, p<0.001). Abnormal rating on each of the eight CDR® plus NACC FTLD domains at the initial visit of MBCI phenoconversion were observed in: “Memory” 36% (MAPT 33%, GRN 33%, C9orf72 44%, p = 0.95); “Orientation” 8% (MAPT 7%, GRN 8%, C9orf72 11%, p = 0.93); “Judgment/Problem Solving” 44% (MAPT 47%, GRN 50%, C9orf72 33%, p = 0.73); “Community Affairs” 22% (MAPT 27%, GRN 17%, C9orf72 22%, p = 0.82); “Home/Hobbies” 25% (MAPT 40%, GRN 8%, C9orf72 22%, p = 0.16); “Personal Care” 0%; “Behavior/Comportment/Personality” 44% (MAPT 60%, GRN 42%, C9orf72 22%, p = 0.19); “Language” 31% (MAPT 13%, GRN 50%, C9orf72 33%, p = 0.12).ConclusionThe three most common FTLD‐CDR domains initially disturbed in the prodromal stage of fFTLD were “Behavior/Comportment/Personality”, “Judgment/Problem Solving”, and “Memory”, while “Orientation” was intact in the majority of the individuals. Memory impairment without disorientation was seen in one‐third of the prodromal fFTLD participants.

AbstractBackgroundThe DEMQOL (Dementia Quality of Life) scale is a patient reported questionnaire and proxy form that captures subjective life quality. Participants in ALLFTD and their Study Partners (SP) complete these questionnaires at each study visit.MethodWe analyzed the DEMQOL in participants and their SPs when the SP was reported to be a spouse or equivalent. Analyses focused on the final overall quality of life (QoL) rating for the participant (poor, fair, good, or very good).ResultDEMQOL responses from 907 dyads (participant: mean age 58.3±13.4 years, 44% female, and mean education 15.9±2.5 years) were analyzed. Participants rated their overall QoL as very good (45.8%), good (36.5%), fair (14%), and poor (3.5%). SPs rated their participant’s overall QoL as very good (33.6%), good (41%), fair (19.4%), and poor (6%). There was a discordance in ratings between participants and SPs (p<0.0001); in almost 50% of cases, participants rated their QoL better (33.2%) or worse (15.2%) than their SP rated their QoL. When considering disease severity (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD global score), participants rated their QoL better than their SP rated their QoL (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0: 19.4%, CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0.5: 42%, and CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 1+: 33.2%), worse than (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0: 15.1%, CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0.5: 13.3%, and CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 1+: 15.2%), or the same (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0: 65.6%, CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 0.5: 44.8%, and CDR®+NACC‐FTLD = 1+: 51.6%).ConclusionAmong participants and SPs, similarities and differences in QoL ratings are fairly consistent regardless of global CDR®+NACC‐FTLD rating. Generally, participants are equally or more optimistic about QoL than their SPs. Longitudinal analyses are forthcoming.

AbstractBackgroundSmartphone‐based cognitive and motor tests enable frequent remote assessments in observational research studies and clinical trials, limiting travel burden and increasing access to research for underrepresented groups. One such smartphone tool is the ALLFTD Mobile App, which was designed to capture the clinical features of neurodegenerative diseases via a battery of cognitive, speech, and motor tasks. In this study, we focus on recruiting a demographically diverse normative sample. We have partnered with the UCSF Brain Health Registry (BHR) to recruit 1,000 cognitively healthy participants across the lifespan. Here we describe the study design and initial feasibility results.MethodsWe designed an automated workflow in which participants never interact with the study team except for troubleshooting. BHR participants without reported cognitive impairment were contacted by email to participate in this study (n = 668). Interested participants downloaded the app onto their smartphone and completed in‐app electronic consent. They were asked to complete three ∼30‐minute sessions of cognitive, motor and speech measures over two weeks. Adherence was determined by evaluating the completion rate of app tasks. In a subset who completed a user experience questionnaire (n = 116), responses were quantified using descriptive statistics.ResultsThe current enrollment rate is 23.20% (155/668) of contacted participants. Average age is 62 (SD = 8.2, range = 25‐84). Average adherence is 76%. Participants reported a range of perceived task difficulty: 38% indicated tasks were “very easy” or “somewhat easy”, 26% indicated they were “neutral,” 36% found the tasks “somewhat difficult,” and none reported them to be “very difficult.” The time commitment was reported to be acceptable by 97% of participants, and 20% were willing to complete additional tasks. Over half (59%) of participants indicated that they preferred using a smartphone to complete cognitive assessments over traditional pen‐and‐paper measures.ConclusionsOur preliminary results demonstrate the feasibility and acceptability of recruiting participants, including older adults, through a registry and conducting remote smartphone testing via a fully automated workflow that is highly scalable. Future analysis will study the effects of demographic factors on feasibility and investigate the reliability and validity of the app measures in this sample.

AbstractBackgroundPosterior cortical atrophy (PCA) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) show overlapping patterns of hypometabolism affecting posterior regions of the brain. Both syndromes show disruptions in functional connectivity, but it is unknown how patterns of disruption within and between networks compare between PCA and DLB.MethodThirty amyloid‐positive PCA, 27 amyloid‐positive DLB (DLB+), 24 amyloid‐negative DLB (DLB‐) patients and 30 cognitively normal amyloid‐negative (CN) individuals were recruited at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, and underwent structural and resting state functional MRI. Spatially preprocessed data was analyzed using the CONN functional connectivity toolbox to explore nine networks: visual, sensorimotor, dorsal‐attention, cerebellar, frontoparietal, memory, language, salience, and default mode networks (DMN). Multivariate linear regression models corrected for multiple comparisons and adjusted for age and sex were fit to analyze within‐network connectivity (Fisher’s R‐to‐Z transformations). Between‐network connectivity was assessed with group level difference maps (two‐sample t‐test) corrected for false discovery rate at p<0.05.ResultMultivariate linear regression models showed reduced within‐network connectivity across all DMN components, sensorimotor, and dorsal‐attention networks, with trends for the visual network in PCA compared to CN. Both DLB‐ and DLB+ showed reduced within‐network connectivity for the cerebellar network, with DLB+ showing reduced connectivity in the posterior‐DMN, memory, and salience networks compared to CN. DLB‐ showed increased connectivity in dorsal‐attention and DMN, while DLB+ showing reduced connectivity in the memory network compared to PCA. Between‐network analysis showed an increase in cerebellar‐to‐sensorimotor connectivity in all three groups, with increase in cerebellar‐to‐dorsal‐attention connectivity in DLB‐ and PCA compared to CN. DLB‐ showed a decrease in posterior‐DMN‐to‐sensorimotor connectivity, while PCA showed reduced connectivity between all DMN components and dorsal‐attention‐to‐sensorimotor connectivity compared to CN. There was an increase in connectivity between all DMN components and a reduction in dorsal‐DMN‐to‐sensorimotor connectivity in both DLB‐ and DLB+ compared to PCA.ConclusionPCA was associated with connectivity disruptions across all DMN components, sensorimotor, dorsal‐attention and visual networks, while both DLB groups showed disruptions in cerebellar networks, with DLB+ showing further disruptions in posterior‐DMN, memory and salience networks. These findings suggest that both PCA and DLB have unique brain network disruptions, with amyloid status influencing connectivity in DLB.

AbstractBackgroundPatients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) may have Alzheimer´s disease (AD) pathology. Plasma biomarkers of beta‐amyloid (Aβ), phosphorylated tau (pTau), and neurodegeneration are sensitive to AD neuropathologic changes in AD dementia. While these plasma biomarkers are well tested in the AD continuum, their performance for concomitant AD pathology in the DLB continuum is still unclear.MethodWe included patients with isolated REM sleep behavior disorder (iRBD; n = 15), with mild cognitive impairment with Lewy bodies (MCI‐LB; n = 37), and with DLB (n = 70) from the Mayo Clinic Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center. Cognitively unimpaired individuals (CU; n = 100) included from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging were balanced on age and sex. A panel of plasma biomarkers of Aβ40, Aβ42, p‐tau181, neurofilament light chain (NfL), and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) measures was obtained. We calculated the ratio of plasma Aβ40/42. Lower Aβ40/42 indicates increased Aβ pathology. Plasma Aβ40, Aβ42, GFAP, and NfL were measured using the Simoa® Neurology 4‐Plex E Advantage kit and pTau‐181 was measured with the Simoa® pTau‐181 Advantage V2 kit. Both were run on a Quanterix HD‐X analyzer. AD imaging biomarkers were assessed on PET using Pittsburgh compound B (PiB) for Aβ and 18F‐Flortaucipir for tau.ResultHigher levels of plasma GFAP were observed in the MCI‐LB (p = 0.014) and DLB (p<0.001) groups compared to CU (Figure). DLB patients also showed higher levels of plasma pTau181 (p<0.001) and NfL (p<0.001). Higher amyloid and tau PET standardized uptake value ratio (SUVr) in the DLB continuum were associated with higher levels of plasma p‐tau181, NfL, and GFAP (p<0.001). After accounting for age, plasma Aβ40/42 did not correlate with amyloid or tau PET SUVr.ConclusionIn the DLB continuum, abnormal levels of GFAP in plasma can be detected as early as the prodromal stages of the disease. Plasma pTau181 reached abnormal levels in the DLB stage. Higher plasma GFAP, NfL, and p‐tau181 are associated with higher amyloid and tau PET SUVr in the DLB continuum. Plasma biomarkers have the potential to contribute to screening and early diagnosis in the DLB continuum, which has implications in designing new treatments.