Knopman, David S.

AbstractBackgroundFor blood‐based biomarkers to fulfill their potential to revolutionize diagnosis and management of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), additional research in diverse populations remains critical. Here, we analyzed a biracial sample to assess the profiles of blood‐based AD biomarkers and their relationships to cognition and medical comorbidities.MethodsSelf‐reported African‐American (AA; n = 267) and non‐Hispanic White (NHW; n = 268) participants evaluated through the Mayo Jacksonville Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center were matched on age, sex, and clinical diagnosis. Plasma AD biomarkers (Aβ42/40, p‐tau181, GFAP, NfL) were measured using the Quanterix SiMoA HD‐X analyzer. Cognition was assessed with the Mini Mental State Examination. Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to assess for differences in plasma biomarker levels by sex. Linear models tested for associations of race, chronic kidney disease (CKD), and vascular risk factors with plasma AD biomarker levels, covarying for age and sex. Additional models assessed for interactions between race and plasma biomarkers in predicting cognition, further covarying for education.ResultsThe sample included adults aged 43‐100 years, with 69% women. Education was higher in NHW participants (median 16 vs. 12 years, p<0.001). APOE (apolipoprotein E) ε4 positivity was higher in AA participants (43% vs. 34%; p = 0.04). There were no differences in plasma AD biomarker levels between AA and NHW participants. These findings were unchanged after stratifying by cognitive status (unimpaired versus impaired). Although the association between p‐tau181 and cognition appeared stronger in NHW participants while the association between Aβ42/40 and cognition appeared stronger in AA participants, these findings did not survive after excluding individuals with CKD. Women displayed higher GFAP (p = 0.002) and lower p‐tau181 (p = 0.001) levels than men. Diabetes was inversely associated with GFAP levels (p<0.001).ConclusionsIn a biracial, community‐based sample, we observed that sex differences, CKD, and vascular risk factors contributed to variation in plasma AD biomarkers, while self‐reported race did not. Our results reinforce the critical need to account for sex and systemic medical comorbidities in equitably deploying blood‐based AD biomarkers in the general population.

AbstractBackgroundPlasma biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) such as phosphorylated tau protein 181 (p‐tau 181), neurofilament light chain (NfL), amyloid‐β 42/40 ratio (Aβ42/40), and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) have shown high performance in the discrimination of those with clinical mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia from cognitively unimpaired individuals, but few population‐based autopsy studies have evaluated the neuropathological correlates of plasma biomarkers.MethodWe utilized a population‐based prospective study of 350 participants with autopsy and antemortem plasma biomarker data. Plasma biomarkers Aβ42/40 ratio, p‐tau181, GFAP, and NfL were measured using Quanterix Simoa assays. We predicted AD neuropathological change (ADNC), Braak staging, and neuritic plaque score using these plasma biomarkers and investigated the added utility of cognitive and demographic information. We utilized a variable selection procedure in cross‐validated (CV) logistic regression models by minimizing the Bayesian Information Criterion to identify the best set of predictors for a given outcome among plasma biomarkers, demographic variables, and neuropsychological tests included in the Mayo Clinic Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite (Mayo‐PACC).ResultADNC was best predicted with plasma GFAP, NfL, p‐tau181 biomarkers along with APOE ε4 carrier status and Mayo‐PACC cognitive score (CV AUC = 0.821). Braak staging was best predicted using plasma GFAP, p‐tau181, and cognitive scores (CV AUC = 0.788). Neuritic plaque score was best predicted using plasma Aβ42/40 ratio, p‐tau181, GFAP, and NfL biomarkers (CV AUC = 0.778). Inclusion of plasma biomarkers demonstrated significantly better prediction of Braak staging (p<0.01) and neuritic plaque score (p<0.01), but not ADNC (p = 0.13), when compared to models that included only cognitive and demographic information. Univariate models consistently underperformed in comparison to multivariate models.ConclusionPlasma biomarkers can provide valuable predictive information about the presence of AD pathology, which can facilitate earlier recognition and diagnosis of AD. Incorporation of demographic and cognitive variables along with plasma variables in multivariable models will improve prediction accuracy of AD pathology, specifically Braak staging and ADNC.

AbstractBackgroundThe Alzheimer’s Association and Society for Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging convened a Workgroup to update previous Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for amyloid PET (Johnson 2013) and develop the first AUC for tau PET. The AUC represent general guidelines and should not be considered a substitute for clinical judgment exercised in the care of individual patients.MethodThe Workgroup included 14 researchers with multidisciplinary expertise. Meetings were held between June 2020 and August 2021. Key research questions were identified using the PICOTS framework, triggering an independent systematic literature review. Using established methods (Fitch 2001), the Workgroup identified 17 clinical scenarios in which amyloid/tau PET may be considered. Appropriateness of amyloid and tau PET as independent, stand‐alone modalities were ranked for each scenario using a 9‐point scale (Table 1). Consensus was achieved using a modified Delphi process. Online surveys were completed iteratively by Workgroup members, followed by discussion, until all votes for each scenario fell within one of the following categories: Appropriate/Uncertain/Rarely Appropriate.ResultAs an over‐arching principle, amyloid/tau PET should be considered in patients who: (1) have undergone a comprehensive assessment by a dementia expert; (2) Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a diagnostic possibility but uncertainty remains; and (3) knowledge of amyloid/tau PET results is expected to help establish diagnosis and guide patient management. Consensus ratings for clinical scenarios are shown in Table 2. More evidence was available to inform recommendations for amyloid than tau PET. Amyloid PET was considered “Appropriate” to inform diagnosis of MCI or dementia due to suspected AD; clarify diagnosis when CSF biomarkers are equivocal; to inform prognosis in MCI; and to determine eligibility for amyloid‐targeting therapies. Tau PET was considered “Appropriate” to clarify diagnosis in patients with MCI/dementia under age 65 or those with atypical presentations; and to inform prognosis in MCI or dementia due to suspected AD.ConclusionThe updated AUC highlight a growing role for amyloid PET and an emerging role for tau PET in the clinical evaluation of cognitively impaired patients. AUC are expected to further evolve based on data from ongoing studies of clinical utility and a rapidly developing therapeutic landscape.

AbstractBackgroundPlasma biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and neurodegeneration have demonstrated diagnostic utility and associations with AD pathology. Our objective was to map the average trajectories over age of plasma biomarkers and more established biomarkers including cognition, amyloid PET, and hippocampal volume.MethodWe included 1731 cognitively unimpaired (CU) and 226 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) participants from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (mean age of 70.3 years; 46.3% female; 14.8 years of mean education) with one or more measurements of amyloid‐PET, MRI with hippocampal volume measurements adjusted for head size (HVa), and plasma biomarkers (Aβ42/40 ratio, p‐tau181, GFAP, and NfL measured using Quanterix Simoa assays). A global cognitive z‐score was created by averaging the z‐scores of memory, language, executive function, and visuospatial domains. Smoothing spline curves were calculated for the values of each variable over age and placed on the same plot. Since each variable has a different scale, the smoothed curves were centered at the predicted value at age 50 and scaled so that a value of 1 would be one standard deviation of the fitted values from ages 50‐80.ResultAt age 50, GFAP and NfL start to increase, and Aβ42/40 was observed to decrease. At age 55, amyloid‐PET and p‐tau181 had a smooth and upward‐curving increase. After age 70, the average values of p‐tau181 increased at a higher rate. Average cognition started declining after 55 years. HVa began to decline after age 60 and then showed a steeper decline at age 72.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that predicted values of plasma GFAP, NfL, and Aβ42/40 across participants begin to change at younger ages than cognitive decline or increases observed in amyloid PET. The changes observed during middle age in GFAP and NfL likely reflect non‐AD pathologies and aging processes, while Aβ42/40 may be a leading indicator of future cerebral amyloidosis. Predicted plasma neurodegenerative biomarkers (GFAP and NfL) begin to change at younger ages than a traditional biomarker of neurodegeneration (HVa). Predicted ptau181 increases were observed in tandem with amyloid PET likely reflecting current amyloid status.

AbstractBackgroundKnowledge of the temporal evolution among plasma Alzheimer’s biomarkers and PET will inform disease pathophysiology and appropriate implementation of plasma biomarkers (Therneau, NeuroImage 2021; Betthauser, Brain 2022). This study investigates the relative timing of progression of plasma p‐tau181, p‐tau217, GFAP, and amyloid PET on individual and population levels.MethodWe included 957 participants from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging with clinical diagnoses of cognitively unimpaired (n = 732), MCI (n = 205), and Alzheimer’s clinical syndrome dementia (n = 20). An accelerated failure time (AFT) model was fit with amyloid (PiB) PET, plasma p‐tau217 (Meso Scale Discovery, Lilly), plasma p‐tau181, and GFAP (Simoa, Quanterix HD‐X) as quad‐variate endpoints, and sex, APOE genotype status, and education as covariates. The model output included a per subject adjustment or time‐shift for each biomarker indicating how much earlier or later it was estimated to progress relative to the average participant, the correlation (R) between adjustments for each pair of biomarkers, and the impact of covariates on each biomarker’s timing. Secondly, we estimated progression at a given age for selected cutpoints.ResultTemporal trajectories for each biomarker are shown in Figure 1. Individual‐level adjustments between plasma p‐tau217 and amyloid PET were highly correlated, R = 0.69(0.64‐0.74); how early or late an individual progressed on plasma p‐tau217 explained 48% of the variation in relative timing of amyloid PET progression. Associations of plasma p‐tau181 and GFAP with amyloid PET individual adjustments were moderate and low, respectively (Figure 2). Using the chosen cutpoints, the estimated order of biomarker progression was GFAP, amyloid PET, plasma p‐tau181, and plasma p‐tau217 (Figure 3).ConclusionOn the individual level, the strong association of the relative timing of progression of plasma p‐tau217 and amyloid PET supports that these processes are mechanistically related. The relatively lower associations of the timing of p‐tau181 and GFAP with amyloid PET likely reflect a lower biological association and greater measurement noise for p‐tau181. The individual adjustments, the primary output of this model, are independent of cutpoints. On the population level, relative timing of biomarker change is highly dependent on the cutpoints applied. This true for any analysis that employs cutpoints, regardless of the approach.

AbstractBackgroundPredictive models of tau‐PET accumulation have largely relied on the functional connectome to estimate its spatial patterns in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Patterns of global functional organization represent a promising avenue as they encapsulate many biological properties relevant to neurodevelopment, cognition and degeneration. We compared approaches based on local connectivity (from task‐free fMRI) and global organization (from FDG‐PET) to predict regional tau‐PET across AD phenotypes.MethodWe included 430 cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals (214 A+T‐, 216 A+T+) and 62 amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), 64 amnestic AD, 21 dysexecutive AD (dAD), 41 logopenic progressive aphasia (LPA) and 49 posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) patients (all A+T+) from the Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center, Mayo Clinic Study of Aging, and Neurodegenerative Research Groups (referred to as “Mayo cohort”). The connectivity approach consisted of assessing the relationship between a region’s tau level and its functional connectivity to the region of highest tau (epicenter). The global organization approach consisted of 1) performing a principal component analysis on 3000 FDG‐PET images that did not overlap with the Mayo cohort, 2) projecting FDG‐PET images of the Mayo cohort onto the low‐dimensional space generated in Step 1 and extracting corresponding weighted values across the first 100 components, 3) using these weighted values as predictors of regional tau‐PET in a linear model and determining optimal parameters based on predicted R 2 values, and 4) using the parameters from the model built in Step 3 to predict tau‐PET in the ADNI cohort (n = 86) (Fig.2).ResultThe connectivity‐based approach yielded adjusted R 2 values ranging from 0.19‐0.45 across diagnostic groups (Fig.1). The global organization approach yielded averaged adjusted R 2 and predicted R 2 values of 0.71 and 0.63, respectively, in the Mayo cohort. Out‐of‐sample median R 2 in the ADNI cohort was 0.41 (range 0.10‐0.60) (Fig.3).ConclusionAn unbiased approach based on the global functional organization of the brain and using an imaging modality widely used in clinical settings outperformed a connectome‐based one to predict regional tau‐PET across the AD phenotypic spectrum. Patterns of tau accumulation may better relate to the large‐scale physiology of the brain underlying specific mental functions rather than local connectivity factors.

AbstractBackgroundWhite matter (WM) plays an important role in cognitive function and undergoes substantial changes due to aging and increase in AD and AD related dementia (AD/ADRD) pathologies. While recent work proposed measurement of global WM changes from diffusion MRI as biomarkers for Cerebrovascular disease (CVD) such as PSMD and free water, there needs to be a better understanding of WM changes due to AD/ADRD pathologies. The goal of our recent work was to understand white matter changes with CVD and AD – common pathologies in AD/ADRD ‐ utilizing data from Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and Mayo ADRC.MethodUsing diffusion MRI (dMRI) in 718 participants from Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (mean age = 71.1 years, 56% male), we investigated relationships between commonly used dMRI measures and vascular risk as well as global amyloid PET. In a subset of 233 participants who were amyloid‐PET positive and also competed Tau‐PET (flortaucipir) from Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and Mayo ADRC, we investigated associations between regional flortaucipir SUVRs in Braak stages and regional WM changes.ResultsWe found greater frontal lobe WM damage with increasing vascular risk across all dMRI measures. We previously validated the strong relationship between the genu of the corpus callosum (anterior interhemispheric connections) dMRI measurements made on antemortem scans and cerebrovascular pathology observed on postmortem tissue (Nguyen et. al. Acta Neuropathologica 2022) supporting the utility of genu of the corpus callosum dMRI measures as a potential CVD biomarker. Also, we found greater posterior WM damage with increasing amyloid burden. Among the 233 amyloid positive participants, we found spatially dependent WM degeneration associated with regional flortaucipir SUVRs in Braak stages with greater extent of posterior WM damage. Further, dMRI measurements of the WM damage provided complementary information about disease staging and progression of AD in addition to flortaucipir SUVR measurements.ConclusionsAnterior WM measurements may be more specific to CVD and posterior WM changes are seen with increasing AD pathological burden. Our results suggest that WM changes observed with CVD and typical AD may be different and have clinical utility for differential diagnosis and disease staging.

Abstract Background Easily accessible and self‐administered cognitive assessments that can aide early identification of individuals at risk for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) dementia are critical for timely intervention. Mayo Test Drive (MTD) is a remote, self‐administered, multi‐device compatible, web‐based cognitive assessment (Stricker et al., 2022). We investigated continuous associations between MTD and amyloid and tau PET biomarkers and compared the strength of association to PET biomarkers and in‐person cognitive measures. Method 556 adults from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging participated (mean age = 70.6; mean education = 16.0 years; 50.7% female; 97.5% white). Participants were predominantly cognitively unimpaired (95.3%; 4.7% had a consensus diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment). Participants completed (1) brain amyloid and tau PET scans, (2) in‐person neuropsychological assessment including Mayo Preclinical Alzheimer’s disease Cognitive Composite (Mayo‐PACC) and Global‐z, and (3) remote MTD comprised of the Stricker Learning Span (SLS) and the Symbols test, which are combined into an MTD composite. Multiple regressions adjusted for age, sex, and education queried associations between imaging biomarkers [amyloid meta‐region of interest (ROI), tau meta‐ROI, and tau entorhinal cortex (EC)‐ROI)] and composite and subtest scores from remote and in‐person measures. Davidson‐Mackinnon J‐test compared R‐squared values of models with remote versus in‐person composites. Result Lower performances on MTD composite and Mayo‐PACC were associated with higher amyloid meta‐ROI (p’s<.05; Table 1). MTD composite was also negatively associated with tau meta‐ROI and EC‐ROI (p’s<.05). For memory measures, SLS sum of trials was negatively associated with tau meta‐ROI (p = .01) and EC‐ROI (p<.001) with no associations between AVLT sum of trials and PET (p’s = .06; Table 2). Among processing speed/executive function measures, worse Trails B performance was associated with higher amyloid meta‐ROI (p<.001). Symbols and Digit Symbol Coding were not associated with PET (p’s = .29). A multivariable model with MTD explained significantly less variance (p = .04) for amyloid meta‐ROI (adjusted R‐squared = 0.165) than a multivariable model with Mayo‐PACC (adjusted R‐squared = 0.176); remote and in‐person composite measures were comparable for other associations (p’s>.05). Conclusion MTD is associated with continuous measures of amyloid and tau PET biomarkers of AD, demonstrating criterion validity for MTD. Several associations were comparable to relationships between gold‐standard in‐person neuropsychological tests and imaging biomarkers.

Abstract Background Brief self‐administered cognitive assessments deployed remotely and combined with plasma biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are well suited to assess clinical symptoms and underlying biology in large‐scale decentralized studies. We investigated whether associations of self‐administered cognitive measures and plasma biomarkers were comparable to associations of in‐person cognitive measures and plasma biomarkers. Method Participants included 327 adults from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (mean age = 70.8; 48% female; mean education = 16.0 years; 96.9% white). Most (94.5%) were cognitively unimpaired; 5.5% had consensus diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment. Participants completed Mayo Test Drive (MTD; Stricker et al., 2022), a remote, self‐administered, multi‐device compatible web‐based cognitive assessment comprised of the Stricker Learning Span (SLS) and Symbols test that are combined into a MTD composite. Participants also completed in‐person neuropsychological assessment (global‐z; Mayo Preclinical Alzheimer’s disease Cognitive Composite [Mayo‐PACC]) and fasting venipuncture. Plasma was assayed via HD‐X simoa platform for amyloid‐beta (Aß)‐42 and Aß‐40 to create an Aß42/40 ratio, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light chain (NfL) using the N4PE Quanterix kit as well as phosphorylated‐tau protein 181 (p‐tau181). P‐tau181, GFAP, and NfL were log10‐transformed. Multiple regression analyses adjusting for age, sex, and education examined associations between plasma biomarkers and composite and subtest scores from remote and in‐person measures. Davidson‐Mackinnon J‐test compared R‐squared values of models with remote versus in‐person composites. Result Lower performances on MTD, global‐z, and Mayo‐PACC (Table 1) were associated with higher GFAP (p’s = .02), NfL (p’s = .003), and p‐tau181 (p’s = .04). For memory, worse SLS and AVLT sum of trials were associated with higher GFAP (p’s = .01) and NfL (p’s = .03). For processing speed/executive function, worse Symbols and Trails B were associated with higher p‐tau181 (p’s = .02). Worse Trails B and Digit Symbol Coding were associated with higher NfL (p’s = .02), and worse Digit Symbol Coding was associated with lower Aß42/40 (p = 0.03; Table 2). A multivariable model with MTD explained significantly more variance (p = .04) for NfL (adjusted R‐squared = 0.461) than a multivariable model with Mayo‐PACC (adjusted R‐squared = 0.447); remote and in‐person composite measures were comparable for other associations (p’s>.05). Conclusion Remote and in‐person composite measures showed comparable associations with AD‐related plasma biomarkers, supporting MTD’s criterion validity.

AbstractBackgroundPatients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) may have Alzheimer´s disease (AD) pathology. Plasma biomarkers of beta‐amyloid (Aß), 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 Aß40, Aß42, p‐tau181, neurofilament light chain (NfL), and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) measures was obtained. We calculated the ratio of plasma Aß40/42. Lower Aß40/42 indicates increased Aß pathology. Plasma Aß40, Aß42, 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 Aß 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 Aß40/42 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.