Hsiung, Ging‐Yuek Robin

AbstractBackgroundFrontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) refers to a group of neurodegenerative conditions, affecting the frontal and/or temporal lobes. Ongoing research has provided insight into developing clinical trials for FTLD and key clinical measures such as structural MRI. To inform clinical trial design and optimize participation, it is imperative to explore facilitators and barriers for potential candidates.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to explore facilitators and barriers to participating in future clinical trials for FTLD.MethodsAdvancing Research and Treatment for Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ARTFL) and Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Frontotemporal Dementia Subjects (LEFFTDS) are observational studies focused on characterizing FTLD syndromes in preparation for clinical trials. The 584 participants enrolled across 18 research sites in the United States and Canada completed a survey assessing interest in clinical trial participation.Results29% of respondents self‐reported as patients (63±10 years), 26% self‐reported as caregivers answering on behalf of patients (65±10 years), and 45% self‐reported as healthy but at risk for FTLD (48±14 years). Travel reimbursement was the most common factor reported to positively influence participation (≧66%), with the healthy but at risk group showing the strongest endorsement (83%). Cost and time involved in travel were possible barriers for about half of the patients (48%) and healthy but at risk respondents (53%). The respondents value receiving feedback on the study findings (≧80%) and being informed of their individual disease progression (≧75%). Particularly, keeping participation confidential was very important for the healthy but at risk group (62%). In regard to research assessments, most participants demonstrated a high interest in physical and neurological exams at a research center (≧87%) whereas only half were interested in doing more invasive procedures such as the lumbar puncture (≧52%). Overall, respondents showed a positive attitude and support for research participation (≧77%) and trusted that their health information would remain confidential in a clinical trial (≧53%).ConclusionsFavorable attitudes and interest towards medical research exist among participants. To optimize participation, clinical trials should allocate funding for travel and involve participants in feedback about study results and their disease progression. Alternatives to invasive assessments may increase participation.

AbstractBackgroundAmyloid‐related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), edema (E) or hemorrhagic (H) type, have been reported in trials of anti‐β‐amyloid passive immunotherapies in sporadic and dominantly inherited Alzheimer Disease (DIAD). However, beyond APOE‐ɛ4 the risk factors and clinical implications of ARIA are not well understood, especially in DIAD populations. Here we characterize ARIA, focusing on ARIA‐E in the DIAN‐TU‐001 trial evaluating gantenerumab and solanezumab in DIAD.MethodThe DIAN‐TU‐001 trial enrolled 194 participants, including 144 DIAD mutation‐carriers receiving gantenerumab (n=52), solanezumab (n=52), or a placebo (n=40). Clinical assessments included the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). Imaging assessments included PiB‐PET and safety MR, including T2‐FLAIR and T2*‐GRE. Treatment dosage and APOE‐ɛ4 status were also reported.ResultEleven participants developed a total of 14 ARIA‐E episodes (discovered on scheduled safety MR) and three had associated mild symptoms reported in retrospect (e.g. headache, imbalance disorder). Though one ARIA‐E case was observed in the solanezumab arm, the following results focus on the gantenerumab arm to prevent unblinding. Recipients of gantenerumab were more likely to develop ARIA‐E compared to placebo (odds ratio (OR)=9.29, 95% confidence interval (CI)=[1.1,75.9], p‐value<0.05). ARIA‐E participants were PiB‐PET+ and 60% were CDR>0. APOE‐ɛ4 tends to be associated with risk for developing ARIA‐E (OR=5.0, 95%CI=[1.0,30.4], p‐value=0.055). ARIA‐E were not observed at initial 225mg dose and were first observed after a titration step (within 4‐24 weeks, after 1‐6 injections, Table 1). Time‐to‐resolution of ARIA‐E was 10.4±6.2weeks. Seven of ten ARIA‐E patients paused/reduced dose escalation and three discontinued treatment. Overall, developing ARIA‐E did not increase the odds of trial discontinuation (OR=1.57, 95%CI=[0.34,7.33], p‐value=0.57). ARIA‐E occurred primarily in the occipital lobe (71%) with associated incident ARIA‐H (microhemorrhages or superficial siderosis) in 60% of ARIA‐E participants. ARIA‐E size was associated with microhemorrhage count (Spearman’s rho=0.72, p‐value<0.05), rate of change (rho=0.78, p‐value<0.01), and baseline PiB‐PET (rho=0.68, p‐value<0.05). Normalizing by baseline, PiB‐PET decreased similarly in ARIA‐E+ (‐0.21±0.20) and ARIA‐E‐ (‐0.16±0.20) participants.ConclusionIn DIAD, gantenerumab dose over 225mg increased ARIA‐E risk, possibly more for APOE‐ɛ4 carriers. ARIA‐E was reversible, generally asymptomatic, and without increased odds of trial discontinuation. These aspects of drug response give insights for managing ARIA‐E occurrence in future trials.

Abstract At present, no research criteria exist for the diagnosis of prodromal behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), though early detection is of high research importance. Thus, we sought to develop and validate a proposed set of research criteria for prodromal bvFTD, termed ‘mild behavioural and/or cognitive impairment in bvFTD’ (MBCI-FTD). Participants included 72 participants deemed to have prodromal bvFTD; this comprised 55 carriers of a pathogenic mutation known to cause frontotemporal lobar degeneration, and 17 individuals with autopsy-confirmed frontotemporal lobar degeneration. All had mild behavioural and/or cognitive changes, as judged by an evaluating clinician. Based on extensive clinical workup, the prodromal bvFTD group was divided into a Development Group (n = 22) and a Validation Group (n = 50). The Development Group was selected to be the subset of the prodromal bvFTD group for whom we had the strongest longitudinal evidence of conversion to bvFTD, and was used to develop the MBCI-FTD criteria. The Validation Group was the remainder of the prodromal bvFTD group and was used as a separate sample on which to validate the criteria. Familial non-carriers were included as healthy controls (n = 165). The frequencies of behavioural and neuropsychiatric features, neuropsychological deficits, and social cognitive dysfunction in the prodromal bvFTD Development Group and healthy controls were assessed. Based on sensitivity and specificity analyses, seven core features were identified: apathy without moderate-severe dysphoria, behavioural disinhibition, irritability/agitation, reduced empathy/sympathy, repetitive behaviours (simple and/or complex), joviality/gregariousness, and appetite changes/hyperorality. Supportive features include a neuropsychological profile of impaired executive function or naming with intact orientation and visuospatial skills, reduced insight for cognitive or behavioural changes, and poor social cognition. Three core features or two core features plus one supportive feature are required for the diagnosis of possible MBCI-FTD; probable MBCI-FTD requires imaging or biomarker evidence, or a pathogenic genetic mutation. The proposed MBCI-FTD criteria correctly classified 95% of the prodromal bvFTD Development Group, and 74% of the prodromal bvFTD Validation Group, with a false positive rate of &lt;10% in healthy controls. Finally, the MBCI-FTD criteria were tested on a cohort of individuals with prodromal Alzheimer’s disease, and the false positive rate of diagnosis was 11–16%. Future research will need to refine the sensitivity and specificity of these criteria, and incorporate emerging biomarker evidence.

AbstractBackgroundFamilial frontotemporal dementia (f‐FTLD) is typically caused by mutations in one of three genes: microtubule‐associated protein tau (MAPT), progranulin (GRN), and a repeat expansion in the chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 (C9orf72) gene. Accurate characterization of the natural history of each mutation is important for clinical prognostication and clinical trial design, and it could shed light on disease biology. Such models have not been thoroughly developed using participants that represent all disease stages, with longitudinal data. We characterized the trajectory of atrophy in each gene by using longitudinal voxel‐wise analyses of gray matter volume, and we assessed whether functional independence declined in tandem.MethodF‐FTLD participants (n=100) with a known mutation (MAPT+ (n=28), GRN+ (n=33), C9orf72+ (n=39)) were grouped according to disease stage (CDR®+NACC FTLD module). We included participants with at least two structural MRIs at a given disease stage: presymptomatic (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD=0, n=57), mild/questionable (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD=0.5, n=15), and symptomatic (CDR®+NACC‐FTLD ≥1, n=28). We fitted longitudinal linear mixed effects models to extract mean atrophy rates in each lobe compared to longitudinal imaging from family members without mutations (n=60). All results presented below were significant at p<.001.ResultUsing the left frontal lobe as an exemplar, in the presymptomatic stage, MAPT mutation carriers showed the greatest rate of atrophy compared to controls (88 mm3/year more volume loss than controls), followed by GRN+ (65 mm3/year) and then C9orf72+ (49 mm3/year). In the mild/questionable stage, MAPT+ showed a greater divergence from controls (374 mm3/year) than did GRN+ (107 mm3/year) or C9orf72+ (223 mm3/year). In the symptomatic stage, MAPT+ again lost volume at the fastest rate (2,099 mm3/year), followed by GRN+ (1,360 mm3/year). C9orf72 expansion carriers showed a much slower rate of volume loss (115 mm3/year). Similar patterns were observed for other brain regions. In contrast to the imaging results, C9orf72+ exhibited similar rates of functional decline compared to GRN+ and MAPT+ at all levels of disease severity.ConclusionThe primary f‐FTLD genes show divergent atrophy trajectories as a function of disease stage, with C9orf72 expansion carriers exhibiting a slow degeneration throughout the disease course, possibly due to unique pathophysiological mechanisms.

AbstractBackgroundPlasma NfL is a sensitive marker of axonal injury that is elevated in symptomatic FTLD and asymptomatic carriers of FTLD‐associated genetic mutations at short‐term risk of phenoconversion to mild behavioral or cognitive impairment or dementia. In carriers of FTLD‐associated genetic mutations, NfL is associated with clinical measures of disease severity.MethodPlasma NfL was measured using single molecule array technology in baseline blood samples from 290 participants in the ARTFL/LEFFTDS consortia. Participants included 181 asymptomatic mutation carriers (C9orf72, GRN, and MAPT); 45 with mild impairment (MBI/MCI), and 64 with dementia. 103 family members without FTLD‐associated mutations served as asymptomatic controls. Social cognition scales were obtained through clinical evaluation at baseline, year 1, and year 2. Stepwise linear regressions assessed NfL relationships with baseline social cognition measures. Linear mixed models were used to test the ability of baseline NfL to predict longitudinal changes. Analyses corrected for age, sex, and genotype.ResultAt baseline, plasma NfL correlated with all measures of social cognition, regardless of genotype. Associations were strongest for the Revised Self‐monitoring Scale (RSMS;β = ‐.50, p < .001), total score of the Social Norms questionnaire (β= .48, p < .001), and caregiver burden (Zarit burden;β = .55, p < .001). Regardless of disease severity, baseline NfL related to worse RSMS scores over time (‐3.7 points at year 2/ LogNfL unit increase, 95% CI ‐1.7 to ‐5.7, p < .001). In MBI/MCI, higher baseline NfL was associated with worse longitudinal scores on the Social Norms questionnaire (‐5.9 points at year 2/LogNfL unit increase, 95% CI ‐1.1 to ‐10.7, p = .016). No associations were seen in asymptomatic non‐carriers.ConclusionIn this familial FTLD cohort, plasma NfL is correlated with clinical measures of social cognition and caregiver burden. Higher baseline plasma NfL concentrations are associated with worsening self‐monitoring and social norms scores over time. These associations suggest that NfL is correlated with clinically meaningful measures that may be relevant to therapeutic development.

AbstractBackgroundThe LEFFTDS Consortium involves investigators at 8 centers in North America evaluating individuals in kindreds with mutations in microtubule associated protein tau (MAPT), progranulin (GRN), or chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 (C9orf72) genes using a standardized battery of measures. Participants are evaluated annually. We sought to determine possible correlations between FTLD disease progression and neuropsychiatric features.MethodThe Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI‐Q) scale is an informant‐based instrument that measures the presence and severity of 12 neuropsychiatric features in patients with dementia. The NPI‐Q was completed at each LEFFTDS visit. The individual NPI questions and total score were analyzed in those with CDR® Dementia Staging Instrument PLUS National Alzheimer Coordinating Center Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (CDR®+ NACC FTLD) ratings of 0 (i.e., clinically normal), 0.5 (i.e., questionably/minimally abnormal), 1, 2, and 3.ResultThe 472 participants enrolled to date with a baseline (Visit 1) assessment have the following characteristics: 261 (55.5%) female, mean age 48 (range 18‐80) years, mean education 16 (range 11‐22) years, and 275 participants with a CDR®+NACC FTLD=0 (58%) and known genetic status. Participants with a CDR®+NACC FTLD=0 plus a genetic mutation were compared to those without a mutation and found to have increased severity of apathy (mean score of 0.116 versus 0.035, p=0.0302). Regardless of the specific mutation, those with a CDR®+NACC FTLD=0.5 were reported to have increased severity of apathy, disinhibition, and irritability. For most domains, mean NPI‐Q severity scores increase between groups up to CDR®+NACC FTLD=2. Depression increases in severity up to CDR®+NACC FTLD=1, whereas apathy severity continues to increase with increasing disease severity through CDR®+NACC FTLD=3. Twenty participants converted from CDR®+NACC FTLD 0 to >0 between their baseline and most recent visit; apathy severity almost tripled in these participants. For those that converted, disinhibition, irritability, and NPI total score were different between baseline and most recent visit (Wilcoxon signed rank test, p<0.05).ConclusionKey neuropsychiatric features measured by the NPI‐Q demonstrate differences in apathy severity between clinically normal mutation vs non‐mutation carriers. Key domains differ at different levels of FTLD severity and show dynamic changes with increasing level of FTLD severity. Supported by AG063911, AG045390, NS092089, AG016976.

AbstractBackgroundIt is important to determine the natural history of sporadic and familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and generate clinical, neuropsychological, neuroimaging and biofluid data for planning disease‐modifying trials.MethodAs part of the ARTFL LEFFTDS Longitudinal Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ALLFTD; U19 AG063911) protocol, investigators at 19 centers in North America will enroll 2100 participants with FTLD over the next 5 years beginning in early 2020.ResultAs of 1/20/20, the ARTFL/LEFFTDS (A/L) Consortium had enrolled 1832 participants, including 850 in kindreds with familial FTLD (239 associated with mutations in MAPT, 192 in GRN, 370 in C9orf72, 4 with mutations in both GRN and C9orf72, and 45 with a mutation in a different gene or no mutation in any known FTLD‐associated gene). Over 500 participants have undergone 2 or more annual visits to date. MRI has been performed in 1105. Biofluid samples have also been collected, with blood (DNA, plasma, serum, mRNA, PBMC) in 1413 and CSF in 303. Over 60 manuscripts using A/L data or samples have been published to date. Five clinical trials involving A/L and ALLFTD participants are in progress or planned. The longitudinal arm in ALLFTD will enroll 500 of existing A/L and 600 future participants for annual assessments with similar methodology to A/L. An additional 1000 FTLD patients will undergo focused one‐time clinical evaluations and biofluid collection.ConclusionThe data/samples from already‐enrolled and planned participants in ALLFTD and findings published to date underscore the utility of evaluating FTLD subjects. The absence of identifiable mutations in some with familial FTLD suggests that other genes are yet to be discovered. ALLFTD data will inform clinical trial design, and many participants will be eligible for future trials. The key data and samples in ALLFTD are available to interested investigators worldwide. Supported by: AG063911, AG045390, NS092089, AG016976, AG21886.

AbstractBackgroundAlzheimer’s disease (AD) prevention trials aim to intervene prior to significant neuronal loss, brain damage, and symptom onset to delay or slow cognitive decline. In dominantly inherited AD (DIAD), mutation carriers develop symptomatic AD at predictable ages with near 100% penetrance. In 2012, the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network Trials Unit Adaptive Prevention Trial (DIAN‐TU APT) platform launched a double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled, parallel group trial of two anti‐amyloid‐beta monoclonal antibodies with two different antigenic targets, gantenerumab and solanezumab (NCT01760005). The DIAN‐TU scientific development, implementation of the first AD prevention trial, trial challenges and opportunities, including dose escalation, and top‐line results will be presented.MethodDIAN was established in 2008 in response to a call from the National Institute of Aging to establish a network to study DIAD and enable future clinical trials. Successive breakthroughs in understanding disease processes enabled the launch of the DIAN‐TU adaptive prevention trial, a global adaptive platform trial supporting testing multiple drugs in parallel. The DIAN‐TU partners include patients and families at risk for DIAD, global academic researchers, the NIH, Alzheimer’s Association, philanthropic supporters, the DIAN‐TU Pharma Consortium, and pharmaceutical companies with drugs being tested. Important milestones include developing a platform to enable a comprehensive efficient treatment trial for this rare population, adding tau PET as part of AMP AD, adapting dosing mid‐trial and extending the original biomarker trial to continue randomized dosing to test a cognitive endpoint until the last patient reaches 4 years, developing a disease progression statistical model and inclusion of DIAN observational data to increase the power to determine drug effects.ResultThe primary and key secondary outcomes of the DIAN‐TU trial will be presented for each therapy in the context of targeting amyloid‐beta at pre‐clinical and clinically symptomatic stages of disease.ConclusionThese results inform about AD hypotheses, timing of treatment and the prospect of slowing, or preventing AD in DIAD and sporadic AD.

AbstractBackgroundGantenerumab is a humanized anti‐amyloid‐beta monoclonal antibody in clinical development for the treatment of several stages of Alzheimer disease (AD). Gantenerumab was evaluated in a phase 2/3 clinical trial program designed to evaluate its efficacy in autosomal dominant AD based on a combination of clinical and biomarker evidence.MethodThe study enrolled both mutation carriers (n=69 with 3:1 randomization of treatment (n=52) vs placebo (n=17)) and non‐carriers (n=28, all on placebo) from 15 years before to 10 years after the expected age of onset inclusive. Patients were both asymptomatic (CDR 0 and MMSE >25) and symptomatic (CDR 0.5‐1 and MMSE >16). There were 41 asymptomatic and 28 symptomatic mutation carriers. The initial dose of gantenerumab was 225 mg monthly administered subcutaneously. The dose was titrated to 1200 mg/month following a protocol amendment based on the increased amyloid lowering seen at higher doses in the gantenerumab program in symptomatic AD. The treatment duration was a minimum of 4 years (range 48‐80 months). The primary outcome was change from baseline in the DIAN‐TU multivariate cognitive endpoint. Secondary clinical outcomes included the DIAN‐TU cognitive composite, Cogstate multivariate cognitive endpoint, CDR SB, and time to CDR progression of >0.5 points. Change from baseline in amyloid PET was the primary biomarker outcome. Other biomarker outcomes included MRI, tau PET, CSF amyloid, tau and phosphotau, and CSF and plasma neurofilament light (NfL). Safety outcomes including ARIA were compared between drug and placebo groups.ResultWe will report change from baseline on the DIAN‐TU multivariate cognitive endpoint, DIAN‐TU cognitive composite, CDR‐SB and other secondary efficacy endpoints. We expect significant lowering on amyloid PET with PIB and florbetapir based on the results from recent anti‐amyloid antibodies, including Gantenerumab, in sporadic AD. We will also present the results of change in other key imaging and fluid biomarkers. The frequency, duration, and severity of ARIA will be reported and compared with studies in sporadic AD.ConclusionThis clinical trial was designed to inform future for ADAD and will provide new insights on the role of amyloid reduction in both pre‐symptomatic and clinical AD.

AbstractBackgroundSolanezumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting soluble forms of β‐amyloid protein important in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Three previous 18‐month double‐blind placebo‐controlled trials of low‐dose solanezumab in late‐onset sporadic AD found inconsistent benefits on cognitive and functional assessments. Dominantly‐inherited mutation‐associated AD subjects both before and after onset of symptoms form an ideal population to study potential benefits of solanezumab therapy.MethodMutation‐carrying asymptomatic (CDR 0, N=41) or mildly symptomatic (CDR 0.5 – 1, N=28) patients were treated for a minimum of 4 years and up to 7 years in a double‐blind 3 to 1 active versus placebo randomized clinical trial that measured disease progression by clinical, neuropsychological and biomarker evaluations. The trial was initiated with a dose of 400 mg every 4 weeks and escalated to 1600 mg when low dose trials in sporadic AD did not meet their primary endpoints. The primary cognitive outcome measure was DIAN‐MCE, composed of Delayed Recall Score of the International Shopping List Test, the Delayed Recall score of the Logical Memory IIa subtest from the Wechsler Memory Scale‐Revised, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test total score from the WAIS‐R and the MMSE total score. Secondary outcomes included a battery of other cognitive and functional measures. The study was powered to detect delay of cognitive disease progression in the DIAN‐MCE. Biomarkers include imaging modalities (volumetric MRI, FDG, amyloid and Tau PET). CSF markers included β‐amyloid, Tau and PhosphoTau species. NfL was measured in both CSF and plasma. The study used a pre‐specified Bayesian multivariate disease progression model, which included dynamic borrowing of control subjects from the DIAN Observational study.ResultThe topline efficacy, safety and biomarker results will be reported.ConclusionThis study provides the first test of targeting soluble abeta forms in DIAD. It addresses the efficacy of early initiation of higher doses of solanezumab targeting soluble forms of amyloid as a disease modifying therapy. While these results are specific to DIAD, they have the potential to inform the application of anti‐amyloid therapy in sporadic AD.