Rowe, Christopher Cleon

Abstract Introduction We sought to establish the relationships between standard postmortem measures of AD neuropathology and antemortem [ 11 C]PIB–positron emission tomography ([ 11 C]PIB‐PET) analyzed with the Centiloid (CL) method, a standardized scale for Aβ‐PET quantification. Methods Four centers contributed 179 participants encompassing a broad range of clinical diagnoses, PET data, and autopsy findings. Results CL values increased with each CERAD neuritic plaque score increment (median −3 CL for no plaques and 92 CL for frequent plaques) and nonlinearly with Thal Aβ phases (increases were detected starting at phase 2) with overlap between scores/phases. PET‐pathology associations were comparable across sites and unchanged when restricting the analyses to the 56 patients who died within 2 years of PET. A threshold of 12.2 CL detected CERAD moderate‐to‐frequent neuritic plaques (area under the curve = 0.910, sensitivity = 89.2%, specificity = 86.4%), whereas 24.4 CL identified intermediate‐to‐high AD neuropathological changes (area under the curve = 0.894, sensitivity = 84.1%, specificity = 87.9%). Discussion Our study demonstrated the robustness of a multisite Centiloid [ 11 C]PIB‐PET study and established a range of pathology‐based CL thresholds.

Abstract In 2011, the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association created separate diagnostic recommendations for the preclinical, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia stages of Alzheimer's disease. Scientific progress in the interim led to an initiative by the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association to update and unify the 2011 guidelines. This unifying update is labeled a “research framework” because its intended use is for observational and interventional research, not routine clinical care. In the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association Research Framework, Alzheimer's disease (AD) is defined by its underlying pathologic processes that can be documented by postmortem examination or in vivo by biomarkers. The diagnosis is not based on the clinical consequences of the disease (i.e., symptoms/signs) in this research framework, which shifts the definition of AD in living people from a syndromal to a biological construct. The research framework focuses on the diagnosis of AD with biomarkers in living persons. Biomarkers are grouped into those of β amyloid deposition, pathologic tau, and neurodegeneration [AT(N)]. This ATN classification system groups different biomarkers (imaging and biofluids) by the pathologic process each measures. The AT(N) system is flexible in that new biomarkers can be added to the three existing AT(N) groups, and new biomarker groups beyond AT(N) can be added when they become available. We focus on AD as a continuum, and cognitive staging may be accomplished using continuous measures. However, we also outline two different categorical cognitive schemes for staging the severity of cognitive impairment: a scheme using three traditional syndromal categories and a six‐stage numeric scheme. It is important to stress that this framework seeks to create a common language with which investigators can generate and test hypotheses about the interactions among different pathologic processes (denoted by biomarkers) and cognitive symptoms. We appreciate the concern that this biomarker‐based research framework has the potential to be misused. Therefore, we emphasize, first, it is premature and inappropriate to use this research framework in general medical practice. Second, this research framework should not be used to restrict alternative approaches to hypothesis testing that do not use biomarkers. There will be situations where biomarkers are not available or requiring them would be counterproductive to the specific research goals (discussed in more detail later in the document). Thus, biomarker‐based research should not be considered a template for all research into age‐related cognitive impairment and dementia; rather, it should be applied when it is fit for the purpose of the specific research goals of a study. Importantly, this framework should be examined in diverse populations. Although it is possible that β‐amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tau deposits are not causal in AD pathogenesis, it is these abnormal protein deposits that define AD as a unique neurodegenerative disease among different disorders that can lead to dementia. We envision that defining AD as a biological construct will enable a more accurate characterization and understanding of the sequence of events that lead to cognitive impairment that is associated with AD, as well as the multifactorial etiology of dementia. This approach also will enable a more precise approach to interventional trials where specific pathways can be targeted in the disease process and in the appropriate people.

Abstract Introduction Identifying at what point atrophy rates first change in Alzheimer's disease is important for informing design of presymptomatic trials. Methods Serial T1‐weighted magnetic resonance imaging scans of 94 participants (28 noncarriers, 66 carriers) from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network were used to measure brain, ventricular, and hippocampal atrophy rates. For each structure, nonlinear mixed‐effects models estimated the change‐points when atrophy rates deviate from normal and the rates of change before and after this point. Results Atrophy increased after the change‐point, which occurred 1–1.5 years (assuming a single step change in atrophy rate) or 3–8 years (assuming gradual acceleration of atrophy) before expected symptom onset. At expected symptom onset, estimated atrophy rates were at least 3.6 times than those before the change‐point. Discussion Atrophy rates are pathologically increased up to seven years before “expected onset”. During this period, atrophy rates may be useful for inclusion and tracking of disease progression.

Abstract During the past decade, a conceptual shift occurred in the field of Alzheimer's disease (AD) considering the disease as a continuum. Thanks to evolving biomarker research and substantial discoveries, it is now possible to identify the disease even at the preclinical stage before the occurrence of the first clinical symptoms. This preclinical stage of AD has become a major research focus as the field postulates that early intervention may offer the best chance of therapeutic success. To date, very little evidence is established on this “silent” stage of the disease. A clarification is needed about the definitions and lexicon, the limits, the natural history, the markers of progression, and the ethical consequence of detecting the disease at this asymptomatic stage. This article is aimed at addressing all the different issues by providing for each of them an updated review of the literature and evidence, with practical recommendations.

Significance Beta-amyloid plaque accumulation, glucose hypometabolism, and neuronal atrophy are hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease. However, the regional ordering of these biomarkers prior to dementia remains untested. In a cohort with Alzheimer’s disease mutations, we performed an integrated whole-brain analysis of three major imaging techniques: amyloid PET, [ 18 F]fluro-deoxyglucose PET, and structural MRI. We found that most gray-matter structures with amyloid plaques later have hypometabolism followed by atrophy. Critically, however, not all regions lose metabolic function, and not all regions atrophy, even when there is significant amyloid deposition. These regional disparities have important implications for clinical trials of disease-modifying therapies.