Jack, C. R.

Abstract Background Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) progression is conceptualized as a cascade of sigmoidal (S‐shaped) curves, with biomarkers shifting sequentially from normal to abnormal states. Estimating these curves requires sophisticated modeling, with challenges including (1) selecting appropriate sigmoidal‐type functions, (2) achieving algorithmic convergence, and (3) producing clinically useful parameters. We compare commonly used sigmoidal‐functions and effects on novel estimates of early and late AD‐biomarker progression ages. Method Using 3,999 Amyloid PET (PiB SUVR) measurements from 1,367 Mayo Clinic Study of Aging participants, we compared model fits (AIC, BIC) between logistic and hyperbolic functions using Non‐Linear Mixed Effect (NLME) models with subject‐specific age‐shifts. We defined novel “initial” and “maximum” acceleration points (IAP and MAP) to compare clinically “earlier” and “later” AD‐progression ages between sigmoidal‐curves. The MAP uses the maximum second‐derivative point, reflecting the age of fastest acceleration in biomarker accumulation. The IAP is defined as the first point where the second derivative of the sigmoidal‐curve exceeds a clinical threshold (here, 5% velocity increase per year), indicating onset age of early accelerated biomarker accumulation. Estimates for C 2 N plasma p ‐tau217 were also attempted (1,306 measurements on 457 participants). Models adjusted for sex and APOE4‐positivity. Result In the larger PET sample, the hyperbola had lower AIC/BIC (better fit), but showed a decreasing early PiB‐SUVR trend (Table 1A, Figure 1). Ages of late MAP were comparable, as were sex and APOE4+ related PiB‐SUVR‐curve shifts. Age of early AD‐onset was estimated 1.5 years earlier for logistic (IAP=63.6) versus hyperbola (IAP=65.1) functions. The logistic function always converged, while the hyperbolic function did not converge for p ‐tau217 in the smaller C 2 N sample. Early‐onset and late‐progression ages were 7‐8 years later for p ‐tau217 versus PiB‐SUVR using logistic‐curves. Conclusion Late AD‐progression and covariate‐related shifts in progression were comparable across models, suggesting robustness to sigmoid choice. In contrast, estimates of early AD‐onset may be more dependent on functional form. While logistic‐sigmoids inherently increase monotonically, hyperbolas do not, here estimating a decline in initial amyloid trend. Future work may explore adding biologically informed constraints to flexible sigmoidal‐functions, and alternative Bayesian approaches, to optimize both model fit and estimation of early AD‐onset age.

Abstract Background Multi‐site aging and dementia studies are challenged by data heterogeneity caused by scanner (manufacturer and protocol) related variability. Quantitative analysis of white matter hyperintensity (WMH) from pooled samples, a traditional marker of cerebrovascular disease, is sensitive to machine variability. Our goal was to compare Deming (symmetric) linear regression and ComBat, a common method used for harmonizing neuroimaging measurements, for harmonizing WMH measurements on participants scanned on two different scanners (GE and Siemens) and protocols (2D FLAIR on GE and 3D FLAIR on Siemens). Methods Cognitively unimpaired (CU) ( n =53, age (mean (SD))=67 (15) years) and cognitively impaired (CI; MCI/dementia) ( n =34, age (mean (SD))=82 (9) years) participants from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and Mayo ADRC were scanned on GE and Siemens scanners within a week of each other (typically done on the same day). WMH as a percentage of total intracranial volume was measured using multispectral segmentation of FLAIR and T1‐weighted images (Gunter et. al. AAIC 2023). We used Deming regression as it includes errors in both input dimensions. ComBat was applied using age, sex, and diagnosis as covariates, with scanner vendor and protocol as the batch variable. We assessed the inter‐scanner similarity using Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD) analysis, where a value of zero indicates identical distributions, p >0.05 indicates no significant difference under H 0 . (Gretton et al., JMLR 2012). Results Our results showed that the distribution of WMH measurements, which were different in the CU group, were more similar after Deming than ComBat harmonization (Figure 1). This was confirmed by the lower MMD in the CU group from Deming regression (‐0.01 ( p =0.76) from 0.03 ( p =0.05)) compared to ComBat (0.04 ( p =0.02))(Figure 1). However, ComBat and Deming were unable to create distributions as compatible as original measurements for the CI group. Conclusion Using a unique dataset of the same participants scanned close in time on different scanner and protocols, we found that (1) MMD measurements were useful to test the need/improvement due to harmonization; (2) ComBat was not substantially better at creating compatible distributions between scanner vendors than Deming regression, and both were sometimes inadequate. Future work will require alternative models to linear scale and shift transformations.

Abstract Background Amyloid related imaging abnormality edema (ARIA‐E) occurs in about 19% of individuals with autosomal dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) treated with an anti‐amyloid‐b monoclonal antibody (Salloway et al., 2021). In a previously reported case, ARIA‐E appeared to colocalize with decreases in PiB‐PET uptake (Joseph‐Mathurin, Llibre‐Guerra, et al, 2022), suggesting an association between amyloid‐b (Aβ) removal and ARIA‐E. Here, we compare longitudinal neuroimaging and corresponding neuropathology in an ADAD individual treated with gantenerumab, who experienced multiple ARIA‐E episodes as sulcal effusions that resolved by the end of the four‐year trial. Methods PiB‐PET and MRI were collected pre‐ and post‐randomization (2 and 4 years). The participant consented to brain donation, which was received a year after trial completion. Four tissue samples were taken from the location of the ARIA‐E in the parieto‐occipital left hemibrain as identified by MRI (one block contained the sulcus affected by ARIA‐E; the rest of the coronal section was captured in the remaining three blocks). Area fractions (AFs) of Aβ (10D5 immunohistochemistry (IHC)), tauopathy (PHF1), microglia (Iba1), and astrocytes (GFAP) in one sulcal region of interest (ROI) from each block and PiB‐PET SUVRs of corresponding ROIs were extracted ( n = 4, Figure 1). Additionally, we included PiB‐PET SUVRs corresponding to ARIA‐E findings observed in the right hemisphere at baseline, two‐year, and four‐year visits ( n = 6). Results Overall PiB‐PET uptake increased during the first two years (before ARIA‐E) and decreased during the last two years (including ARIA‐E episodes) (0.03±0.05 vs. ‐0.04±0.04 SUVR/year, p ‐value=0.01, Figure 2). The decrease seemed more pronounced in ARIA‐E ROIs versus normal‐appearing sulcus ROIs (‐0.05±0.04 vs. ‐0.02±0.03 SUVR/year). Lower PiB uptake at last visit appeared associated with lower Aβ AF (estimates=0.03±0.01, p ‐value=0.07). The ARIA‐E ROI had an Aβ AF of 0.009 while normal‐appearing sulcus ROIs had a mean of 0.02+0.003 (Figure 3). AFs for tauopathy, microglia, and astrocytes were within the range of those of normal‐appearing sulcus ROIs, suggesting an Aβ‐specific effect, although unexamined markers may play a role. Conclusions Our preliminary findings indicated that ARIA‐E is associated with longitudinal PiB‐PET decrease and Aβ AF, supporting the link between ARIA‐E, changes in PiB‐PET, and local Aβ removal observed at autopsy. Funding : K01AG080123; U01AG042791; R01AG046179; R01AG053267

Abstract Background Use of software to “de‐face” research brain images has grown as advances in automated face recognition have made it increasingly possible to re‐identify participants. Imaging studies of Alzheimer’s Disease and related diseases have included more participants from historically underrepresented groups, but de‐facing software have primarily been validated using images from mostly non‐Hispanic White participants, and its performance has not been directly compared across ethnoracial groups. Method From The Health and Aging Brain Study: Health Disparities (HABS‐HD) study, we constructed a sample of 305 T1‐weighted MRI from HABS‐HD baseline visits, matched across three ethnoracial groups (non‐Hispanic White (NHW, n = 104), non‐Hispanic African American (AA, n = 104), Mexican American (MA, n = 97)) according to age‐decade, sex, cognitive status (impaired/unimpaired), and MRI scanner model. We ran mri_reface 0.3.5 on each image, and we ran FreeSurfer 7.4.1 on each unmodified image and on each de‐faced output. We then compared regional gray matter (GM) volume and cortical thickness measurements by subtracting each de‐faced image measurement from the corresponding unmodified image measurement. We compared these differences between de‐faced and unmodified images across the three matched groups using GLM analyses adjusted for age, sex, and cognitive status, and Bonferroni corrected. Result When aggregating across all brain regions, differences in cortical thickness measures due to de‐facing were significantly different between the NHW and MA groups, and between AA and MA, but not between NHW and AA (Figure 1). Differences between these group means were <0.005mm. For GM volume, differences were significant between AA and MA (magnitude < 0.2%), but not between NHW and AA or NHW and MA (Figure 2). Examining each region individually (Figure 3), cortical thickness differences were significant for only 4 regions (all with magnitudes <0.03mm), and GM volume differences were significant for only 6 regions (all with magnitudes <2%). Conclusion Effects of mri_reface on FreeSurfer brain measurements were significantly different across ethnoracial groups. Our future work will optimize mri_reface to eliminate these differences. However, the magnitudes of these differences are sufficiently small that they are unlikely to have a practical effect on analyses of data using current versions.

Abstract Background Diffusion MRI (dMRI) measures are increasingly being used as biomarkers for aging and dementia in multi‐center studies. Measurements in longitudinal studies are often acquired on different systems, which can result in systematic differences of machine origin (e.g. vendor, hardware, algorithms). This may warrant harmonization prior to pooling multi‐site data. However, harmonization algorithms may introduce a risk of removing valuable information content and reducing sensitivity to physiological factors (e.g. sex, age, disease). Here, we tested the hypothesis that protocol standardization may minimize machine‐origin differences, obviating a need for post‐acquisition harmonization in a two‐site (Mississippi‐MS and Minnesota‐MN) cohort of the longitudinal Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA). Methods Two data sets were analyzed: first, a crossover dataset with 80 participants (scanned within 2 days) bridging two different protocols on GE and Siemens scanners; second, participants scanned using standardized protocols from the ongoing MCSA ( N MN‐MCSA =204; N MS‐MCSA =52). Parameters are listed in Figure 1. For crossover data, analyses were repeated with GE data resampled to 2‐mm isotropic resolution, and discarding Siemens‐only b‐shells to artificially reduce protocol disparities. Analysis encompassed visualization of overlain subjectwise histogram‐derived densities obtained from whole‐brain masks for dMRI measures; and median dMRI measures from within the genu of the corpus callosum (GCC) with nonparametric statistical testing. When available, both DTI and NODDI measures were compared. Results Pronounced visual distributional differences seen between MD and FA in crossover data were reduced with resampling of GE data and including only b‐shells shared across acquisitions. For the resampled/reshelled data, significant differences remained for all GCC‐FA comparisons, but not all GCC‐MD (Figure 2). For the ongoing MCSA data from two sites, MD and FA whole‐brain densities were more closely aligned, with GCC‐FA and GCC‐MD showing no significant differences (Figure 3). NODDI measures showed more discordant densities than DTI measures, including shifts in most probable values and differences in distributional arrangement. Conclusions Our work provides further evidence supporting protocol and processing standardization for minimizing machine‐origin differences prior to considering harmonization. Differences in dMRI metrics seen when comparing across unstandardized protocols were reduced when protocols were standardized. NODDI metrics had more apparent sensitivity to site than DTI measures.

Abstract Background T2*‐weighted imaging is of paramount importance for patient treatment eligibility and safety monitoring in anti‐amyloid pharmaceutical clinical trials and clinical care. Recently with the adoption of multi‐echo GRE (GRE) sequences, susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI), and quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) can be obtained in the same acquisition. In 2024, the QSM Consensus Organization Committee released a white paper recommending at least 1 mm isotropic voxel size for QSM. In clinical workflows microbleed detection is performed with higher in‐plane resolution (0.5x0.5mm 2 ), and large out‐of‐plane resolution (∼1.8mm), which was used in the ADNI4 protocol. In the CLARiTI protocol, a 1mm isotropic resolution was adopted. The objective of this work was to compare susceptibility estimates between the ADNI4 (0.5x0.5x1.8mm 3 ) and CLARiTI (1mm 3 ) protocols. Method The ADNI4 and CLARiTI QSM protocols were acquired on forty‐seven subjects (33 cognitively unimpaired (CU), 14 cognitively impaired (CI), in the same scan session. The groups were defined by their Clinical Demential Rating (CDR) global score (CDR global = 0 for CU, and CDR global >= 0.5 for CI subjects). QSM images were generated using publically available software (STI Suite, UC Berkeley). Mean susceptibility values in atlas regions were compared. Result Significant group differences (CU vs. CI) were observed in the fusiform and middle occipital gyrus with the ADNI4 protocol, only in the rectus with the CLARiTI protocol (Figure 1). These three regions are small in size and closer to surface‐air interfaces, which may have impacted estimation accuracy. However, in the substantia nigra and its sub‐regions (pars compacta and pars reticulata), which shows increased susceptibility in Lewy body disease, the ADNI4 and CLARiTI protocols were in good agreement (r 2 > 0.9) (Figure 2). Conclusion Group differences were observed between the ADNI4 and CLARiTI QSM only in 3 small regions close to surface‐air interfaces in this small dataset. The two techniques showed highly correlated (r 2 = 0.93) estimates in the substantia nigra, a region with high susceptibility due to iron deposition. Strong correlations between the two protocols are encouraging. Radiologists have historically preferred submillimeter in‐plane resolution for microbleed detection, which is more time manageable with anisotropic imaging.

Abstract Background Neuroimaging data typically arrives as Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) files, batched by exam. We use exam or study to denote a single imaging session of a participant, containing up to ∼40 series (the generic term for scans and derived products). Different series have different properties and applications, making their labeling complex. Filenames often change in transit, and Series Description tags (0008, 103E) are arbitrary, operator‐entered, and unreliably coupled to the series type. Furthermore, label preferences vary from site to site, making the application of a common classification system mandatory for multisite studies. Here we describe the system that we have developed and applied to the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and SCAN. Method Although Series Description is unreliable, DICOM includes other tags that parameterize MR pulse sequences and suggest their purpose. The mapping from these features to types is difficult to explicitly specify, especially since different manufacturers and protocols use different conventions. Thus we developed a machine learning classifier using 4060 semiautomatically labeled head and spinal series from 1.5 to 7T MR scanners, including both site‐specific and standard protocols designed to study a wide range of neurological conditions, including dementia, hydrocephalus, and multiple sclerosis. An 80%/20% split, stratified by type, was used for the training/test sets. After initial training, a few cases in the training set with high errors due to rarity were augmented and the model retrained. Performance was evaluated on the clean test set. Result The taxonomy is presented in Table 1. The classifier correctly identified 807 out of 812 (99.4%) series, with the error cases coming from outside the ADNI or SCAN protocols (Table 2). The confusion matrix is shown in Figure 1. Conclusion We implemented an automatic series type classifier with labels chosen to be generally useful for the brain MRI community. Some errors were noted, but the test set was deliberately challenging and the errors appear to be ones that could easily be made by a human. The classifier is expected to have good tolerance for as yet unseen head MR protocols but is likely unsatisfactory for body MRI.

Abstract Background Plasma neurofilament light chains (NfL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) are blood‐based biomarkers of axonal injury and astrocytic activation, respectively, that are elevated in those with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) relative to cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals. Neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI) is a multishell diffusion MRI method capable of evaluating tissue microstructure at the axonal and dendritic level. We evaluated associations between temporal cortex orientation dispersion index (ODI), neurite density index (NDI) and isotropic volume fraction (ISOVF) and plasma NfL and GFAP concentrations. Method We included Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA) participants (ages 60‐95 years) with diagnoses or CU ( n = 356) or MCI ( n = 60), and Alzheimer’s Dementia Research Center (ADRC) participants with dementia ( n = 51). NODDI imaging was obtained on a 3T Siemens Prisma scanner with 2 mm isotropic resolution. NfL and GFAP were measured using the Simoa® Neurology 4‐Plex E Advantage kit. We fit separate linear regression models within each MCALT_ADIR122 cortical ROI with regional NODDI as the primary predictor and log‐transformed plasma concentration as the outcome. Models were adjusted for age, sex, BMI, cortical thickness (or hippocampal & amygdalar volume) and total intracranial volume. Result The Table displays demographic data. Figures 1 & 2 show the relationship of NDI and ISOVF measures to plasma NfL concentrations across participants in individual ROIs (similar findings were noted with GFAP). A significant inverse relationship between NfL concentrations and NDI was observed in hippocampus, amygdala, entorhinal cortex, parahippocampal gyrus as well as all temporal neocortical regions except the superior temporal gyrus ( p <0.001) (Figure 1), whereas higher NfL concentrations were associated with higher ISOVF in all regions ( p <0.001) (Figure 2). Fewer significant associations were also seen with ODI. After adjusting for age, cortical thickness/volume and other confounds, significant associations with NDI remain, particularly in hippocampal and amygdalar regions. Conclusion NODDI‐derived measures (NDI and ISOVF) within the temporal lobe cortical regions demonstrate significant associations with plasma biomarkers of axonal and astrocytic dysfunction that are elevated during cognitive decline. This association provides preliminary validation of the utility of NODDI in assessing cortical microstructural changes associated with cognitive decline.

Abstract Background The Joint Propagation Model (JPM)‐based CenTauR scale was recently introduced to harmonize tau‐PET quantification across different radiotracers. This study examined how CenTauR harmonization enhances the comparability of tau‐PET quantification across matched cohorts using different tracers. The evaluation focused on three key aspects: (1) comparing tau‐PET positivity rates as defined by CenTauR, (2) evaluating its diagnostic accuracy for symptomatic AD, and (3) analyzing longitudinal changes in tau‐PET rates over time. Method The JPM, developed by the CPAD‐led Tau PET Harmonization Working Group (Leuzy et al., Alzheimers Dement. 2024; Figure 1A), models relationships between anchor point subjects and head‐to‐head tau‐PET SUVR data onto the CenTauR scale, providing conversion equations for multiple tracers. JPM equations were applied to [¹⁸F]flortaucipir SUVR (Meta‐temporal ROI) data from 561 cognitively impaired participants in the ADNI and OASIS‐3 studies. Using ROC analysis, we determined the CenTauR cut‐off for positivity (T+) that maximized the Youden index for discriminating between FDA‐approved positive/negative visual reads. Three separate cohorts, scanned using [¹⁸F]flortaucipir (ADNI), [¹⁸F]MK‐6240 (CPAS), and [¹⁸F]RO‐948 (BioFINDER‐2), were matched 1:1 by age, MMSE, amyloid‐β, and clinical diagnosis. CenTauR‐based metrics were compared across these cohorts. Result A cut‐off of 18 CenTauRs was found to optimally classify [ 18 F]flortaucipir PET visual reads (Figure 1B). The matching procedure identified 1089 participants (363 per cohort). The frequency of T+ using the 18 CenTauRs cut‐off for the Meta‐Temporal ROI was highly comparable across tracers across groups, except for the Aβ‐positive cognitively unimpaired group, where variability was more pronounced due to a smaller sample size (Figure 2A). Similarly, tau‐PET discriminative accuracy for symptomatic AD vs controls remained similar across [ 18 F]flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240 (Figure 2B). In a separate sample of 212 matched participants from ADNI ([¹⁸F]flortaucipir) and AIBL ([¹⁸F]MK‐6240) with baseline and 1‐year follow‐up tau‐PET scans, 1‐year change in CenTauRs was comparable (Figure 2C). An exploratory voxelwise transformation, utilizing the Meta‐Temporal conversion equation in a representative case scanned with both [¹⁸F]flortaucipir and [¹⁸F]MK‐6240, demonstrates the potential for voxelwise CenTauR harmonization (Figure 3). Conclusion These analyses suggest that CenTauR harmonization increases the comparability of tau‐PET data acquired with different tracers. Additional validation analyses with larger cohorts including other radiotracers ([¹⁸F]PI‐2620) are underway.