Citations

Abstract Background Ten years after the original publication, the Centiloid framework is now broadly used to harmonize amyloid‐PET quantification, facilitate data sharing and comparison across cohorts, and even assist visual interpretation in clinical settings. We evaluated the global implementation of Centiloids by comparing their distribution and corresponding positivity thresholds across cohorts. Methods We gathered data from publicly available cohorts and reached out to investigators across the world to collect cross‐sectional Centiloids, demographic and clinical information, and visual read data. Gaussian mixture models (GMM, k=2) were fitted to Centiloid values for each cohort and cutoffs were calculated as mean + 2SD of the lower Gaussian. When visual reads were available, we determined Centiloid cutoffs that maximized correspondence with visual reads (Cohen’s kappa). Data was combined across cohorts using random effects meta‐analyses. Results As of January 2025, we included 37 cohorts ( n = 41,678 participants) with heterogeneous pipelines, radiotracers, and clinical and demographic characteristics (Table‐1). The low Gaussian peaks ranged from ‐9 to 10CL; the meta‐analysis identified a common peak at 1CL. The second peaks were more heterogeneous (range=38‐102CL; meta‐analysis outcome=64CL). Across cohorts, the proportion of cognitively unimpaired versus impaired participants impacted the position of both peaks, with better separation in cohorts enriched in impaired individuals (Figure‐1C). The meta‐analysis indicated a GMM‐based cutoff of 19CL (95%CI: 16‐21CL, Figure‐1B); subgroup analyses showed no evidence of significant effect between single versus multicenter settings (17 versus 20CL, p = 0.30), MRI‐based or PET‐only processing (18 versus 19CL, p = 0.88), and no evidence of difference across radiotracers (Flutemetamol: 16CL; PIB: 17CL, Flutafuranol: 18CL, Florbetaben: 19CL, Florbetapir: 20CL, p = 0.78). In a subset of 29,496 participants with visual reads available, binary visual reads corresponded well to Centiloids (common kappa=0.86, Figure‐2A). The visual read‐based cutoff of 24CL (95%CI: 21‐27CL, Figure‐2B) maximized correspondence between visual read and quantification and was slightly higher than the GMM‐based cutoff. All meta‐analysis models showed high non‐random heterogeneity (I 2 >80%) across studies, suggesting non‐random differences in peaks and cutoffs. Conclusions Meta‐analysis‐based cutoffs align well with thresholds from the existing literature. High heterogeneity among studies underscores the need to investigate contributing factors, raising concerns about applying common cutoffs.

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 INTRODUCTION Brief digital cognitive measures may be a valuable and scalable alternative to traditional tests for improving early detection and disease monitoring in patients with early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD). METHODS We examined the convergent, diagnostic, and neuroanatomical validity of Tablet‐based Cognitive Assessment Tool (TabCAT) tests in the multisite Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study. Four hundred seventy‐five participants from 16 sites (83 cognitively unimpaired participants, 146 individuals diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment [MCI], and 246 with mild dementia) underwent TabCAT testing, including two executive/attentional tasks (Match and Flanker) and two visuospatial tasks (Line Length and Line Orientation). RESULTS TabCAT tests showed good convergent validity with traditional pen‐and‐paper tests. Match was the most accurate TabCAT test in differentiating among clinical groups (controls vs. MCI vs. dementia) and predicting amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) positivity in clinically impaired participants. TabCAT tests were associated with regional tau PET patterns. DISCUSSION TabCAT digital measures have promise for frontline identification of patients with EOAD. Highlights Four hundred seventy‐five participants from 16 US sites underwent tablet‐based cognitive assessment. Digital tests assessed executive function and visuospatial abilities. Digital tests correlated with traditional pen‐and‐paper cognitive tests. Match (test of executive function) differentiated clinical groups. Digital tests were associated with amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) status and regional tau PET patterns.

Abstract BACKGROUND Understanding long-term sequelae of cancer care is critical. Cognitive impairment is a common and disabling survivorship issue. Because sex influences tumor biology, therapy exposure, and dementia risk, we examined whether cancer care for a prior malignancy alters late-life cognitive outcomes differently in males and females. METHODS We assessed adults ≥50 years, cognitively normal at study entry, from a longitudinal, population-based cohort (Mayo Clinic Study of Aging). Participants were linked to our institutional cancer registry (excluding non-melanoma skin cancers). Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia were adjudicated by consensus. We fitted multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models to estimate how prevalent cancer diagnosis influenced the risk of developing MCI/dementia. Sex-specific effects were determined by incorporating a cancer×sex interaction term and by generating separate hazard ratios. Analyses were controlled for age, APOE4 status, education, and presence of vascular/metabolic conditions. RESULTS 5793 MCSA participants (female: 49.4%, APOE4 positive: 27.5%) were included in the study, with a mean age of 73 years at study entry. Incident MCI was recorded in 866 participants, and 737 were diagnosed with incident dementia. About 20% (n=1176) of the cohort had a cancer diagnosis, most commonly prostate (n=423) and breast (n=277). There was no independent relationship between history of cancer and risk for MCI or dementia. We found that males with cancer had an increased risk for MCI (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.04-1.57, p=0.003) and dementia (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04-1.6, p=0.053). Conversely, females with cancer had a lower risk for MCI (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.61-1.01, p=0.063), although this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Our data suggests male cancer survivors may be more susceptible to cognitive impairment, independent of age, APOE4 status, education, and vascular/metabolic burden. Elucidating the hormonal, treatment-related, and systemic pathways driving this should be a priority for future mechanistic studies.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Research is limited regarding meaningful change thresholds for individual patients on clinical outcome assessments (COAs) frequently used in clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD), particularly in population‐based studies early in the disease course. METHODS There were 646 study participants in the population‐based Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA), 54–99 years old (47% females), who developed the clinical syndromes of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) with complete data to establish clinically meaningful within‐patient change thresholds in cognitive and functional COAs. RESULTS Using the diagnosis of incident MCI as the anchor, mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) annualized estimates of change were: Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale Sum of Boxes (SB) 0.49 (0.43, 0.55), Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) −1.01 (−1.12, −0.91), and Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) score 1.04 (0.82, 1.26). DISCUSSION This study provides within‐patient estimates of clinically meaningful change early in disease progression in a community‐based sample. Highlights We studied incident mild cognitive impairment (MCI) participants from a population‐based study. Within‐patient change thresholds were estimated for clinical outcome assessments (COAs) used in clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD). These estimates may be used to plan and evaluate clinical trials involving disease‐modifying therapies (DMTs).