Citations

AbstractINTRODUCTIONWe used sex and apolipoprotein E ε4 (APOE ε4) carrier status as predictors of pathologic burden in early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD).METHODSWe included baseline data from 77 cognitively normal (CN), 230 EOAD, and 70 EO non‐Alzheimer's disease (EOnonAD) participants from the Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS). We stratified each diagnostic group by males and females, then further subdivided each sex by APOE ε4 carrier status and compared imaging biomarkers in each stratification. Voxel‐wise multiple linear regressions yielded statistical brain maps of gray matter density, amyloid, and tau PET burden.RESULTSEOAD females had greater amyloid and tau PET burdens than males. EOAD female APOE ε4 non‐carriers had greater amyloid PET burdens and greater gray matter atrophy than female ε4 carriers. EOnonAD female ε4 non‐carriers also had greater gray matter atrophy than female ε4 carriers.DISCUSSIONThe effects of sex and APOE ε4 must be considered when studying these populations.HIGHLIGHTS Novel analysis examining the effects of biological sex and apolipoprotein E ε4 (APOE ε4) carrier status on neuroimaging biomarkers among early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD), early‐onset non‐AD (EOnonAD), and cognitively normal (CN) participants. Female sex is associated with greater pathology burden in the EOAD cohort compared to male sex. The effect of APOE ε4 carrier status on pathology burden was the most impactful in females across all cohorts.

Abstract INTRODUCTION We compared white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) in early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) with cognitively normal (CN) and early‐onset amyloid‐negative cognitively impaired (EOnonAD) groups in the Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study. METHODS We investigated the role of increased WMH in cognition and amyloid and tau burden. We compared WMH burden of 205 EOAD, 68 EOnonAD, and 89 CN participants in lobar regions using t ‐tests and analyses of covariance. Linear regression analyses were used to investigate the association between WMH and cognitive impairment and that between amyloid and tau burden. RESULTS EOAD showed greater WMHs compared with CN and EOnonAD participants across all regions with no significant differences between CN and EOnonAD groups. Greater WMHs were associated with worse cognition. Tau burden was positively associated with WMH burden in the EOAD group. DISCUSSION EOAD consistently showed higher WMH volumes. Overall, greater WMHs were associated with worse cognition and higher tau burden in EOAD. Highlights This study represents a comprehensive characterization of WMHs in sporadic EOAD. WMH volumes are associated with tau burden from positron emission tomography (PET) in EOAD, suggesting WMHs are correlated with increasing burden of AD. Greater WMH volumes are associated with worse performance on global cognitive tests. EOAD participants have higher WMH volumes compared with CN and early‐onset amyloid‐negative cognitively impaired (EOnonAD) groups across all brain regions.

AbstractIntroductionOne goal of the Longitudinal Early Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS) is to define the fluid biomarker characteristics of early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD).MethodsCerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of Aβ1‐40, Aβ1‐42, total tau (tTau), pTau181, VILIP‐1, SNAP‐25, neurogranin (Ng), neurofilament light chain (NfL), and YKL‐40 were measured by immunoassay in 165 LEADS participants. The associations of biomarker concentrations with diagnostic group and standard cognitive tests were evaluated.ResultsBiomarkers were correlated with one another. Levels of CSF Aβ42/40, pTau181, tTau, SNAP‐25, and Ng in EOAD differed significantly from cognitively normal and early‐onset non‐AD dementia; NfL, YKL‐40, and VILIP‐1 did not. Across groups, all biomarkers except SNAP‐25 were correlated with cognition. Within the EOAD group, Aβ42/40, NfL, Ng, and SNAP‐25 were correlated with at least one cognitive measure.DiscussionThis study provides a comprehensive analysis of CSF biomarkers in sporadic EOAD that can inform EOAD clinical trial design.

AbstractBackgroundThe Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer Disease study (LEADS) aims to robustly characterize biomarkers of early‐onset AD (EOAD). Here we quantified white matter hyperintensities (WMH) in EOAD and compared the volume of WMH with that of cognitively normal (CN) and amyloid‐negative early‐onset dementia (EOnonAD) groups.MethodsWe compared WMH of 194 amyloid‐positive EOAD, 59 amyloid‐negative EOnonAD, and 88 cognitively normal participants. WMH in left and right frontal, temporal, parietal, and occipital regions was compared between the group, as well as the sum total in each hemisphere. For distributional considerations, the logarithm of the WMHs was used in the analyses. Group comparisons were performed using t‐tests. Analyses of variance were used to compare the groups after correcting for the effects of age, sex, and education. Linear regression analyses were used to investigate the association between cognitive impairment and WMH using age, sex, and education as covariates. Cognitive impairment was measured using the Mini‐Mental State Exam (MMSE) and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale sum of boxes (CDR‐sb). All p‐values were corrected for multiple comparisons using the false discovery rate method.ResultsEOAD showed greater WMH compared with both CN and EOnonAD groups across all regions. This relationship holds after correcting for the effects of age, sex, and education (see Figure 1 and Table 1, all p‐values < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between WMHs of CN and EOnonAD groups. Higher WMH values were associated with greater cognitive impairment: MMSE (b = ‐1.69, p‐value <0.0001) and CDR‐sb (b = 0.45, p‐value <0.0001).ConclusionsEOAD consistently show higher WMH compared to their CN and EOnonAD peers. The extent of WMH in CN and EOnonAD groups is similar. No differences in regional distribution were observed, with EOAD having higher WMH across all brain regions. Higher WMHs were associated with worse cognitive impairment measured both using MMSE and CDR sum of boxes.

AbstractIntroductionWe examined neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) and psychotropic medication use in a large sample of individuals with early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD; onset 40‐64 years) at the midway point of data collection for the Longitudinal Early‐onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS).MethodsBaseline NPS (Neuropsychiatric Inventory – Questionnaire; Geriatric Depression Scale) and psychotropic medication use from 282 participants enrolled in LEADS were compared across diagnostic groups – amyloid‐positive EOAD (n = 212) and amyloid negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer's disease (EOnonAD; n = 70).ResultsAffective behaviors were the most common NPS in EOAD at similar frequencies to EOnonAD. Tension and impulse control behaviors were more common in EOnonAD. A minority of participants were using psychotropic medications, and use was higher in EOnonAD.DiscussionOverall NPS burden and psychotropic medication use were higher in EOnonAD than EOAD participants. Future research will investigate moderators and etiological drivers of NPS, and NPS differences in EOAD versus late‐onset AD.

AbstractObjectiveThe Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS) seeks to provide comprehensive understanding of early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD; onset <65 years), with the current study profiling baseline clinical, cognitive, biomarker, and genetic characteristics of the cohort nearing the data‐collection mid‐point.MethodsData from 371 LEADS participants were compared based on diagnostic group classification (cognitively normal [n = 89], amyloid‐positive EOAD [n = 212], and amyloid‐negative early‐onset non‐Alzheimer's disease [EOnonAD; n = 70]).ResultsCognitive performance was worse for EOAD than other groups, and EOAD participants were apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 homozygotes at higher rates. An amnestic presentation was common among impaired participants (81%), with several clinical phenotypes present. LEADS participants generally consented at high rates to optional trial procedures.ConclusionsWe present the most comprehensive baseline characterization of sporadic EOAD in the United States to date. EOAD presents with widespread cognitive impairment within and across clinical phenotypes, with differences in APOE ε4 allele carrier status appearing to be relevant.HIGHLIGHTS Findings represent the most comprehensive baseline characterization of sporadic early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) to date. Cognitive impairment was widespread for EOAD participants and more severe than other groups. EOAD participants were homozygous apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 carriers at higher rates than the EOnonAD group. Amnestic presentation predominated in EOAD and EOnonAD participants, but other clinical phenotypes were present.

AbstractOBJECTIVEInvestigation of learning slopes in early‐onset dementias has been limited. The current study aimed to highlight the sensitivity of learning slopes to discriminate disease severity in cognitively normal participants and those diagnosed with early‐onset dementia with and without β‐amyloid positivityMETHODData from 310 participants in the Longitudinal Early‐Onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (aged 41 to 65) were used to calculate learning slope metrics. Learning slopes among diagnostic groups were compared, and the relationships of slopes with standard memory measures were determinedRESULTSWorse learning slopes were associated with more severe disease states, even after controlling for demographics, total learning, and cognitive severity. A particular metric—the learning ratio (LR)—outperformed other learning slope calculations across analysesCONCLUSIONSLearning slopes appear to be sensitive to early‐onset dementias, even when controlling for the effect of total learning and cognitive severity. The LR may be the learning measure of choice for such analyses.Highlights Learning is impaired in amyloid‐positive EOAD, beyond cognitive severity scores alone. Amyloid‐positive EOAD participants perform worse on learning slopes than amyloid‐negative participants. Learning ratio appears to be the learning metric of choice for EOAD participants.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONAt the Alzheimer's Association's APOE and Immunity virtual conference, held in October 2021, leading neuroscience experts shared recent research advances on and inspiring insights into the various roles that both the apolipoprotein E gene (APOE) and facets of immunity play in neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's disease and other dementias.METHODSThe meeting brought together more than 1200 registered attendees from 62 different countries, representing the realms of academia and industry.RESULTSDuring the 4‐day meeting, presenters illuminated aspects of the cross‐talk between APOE and immunity, with a focus on the roles of microglia, triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2), and components of inflammation (e.g., tumor necrosis factor α [TNFα]).DISCUSSIONThis manuscript emphasizes the importance of diversity in current and future research and presents an integrated view of innate immune functions in Alzheimer's disease as well as related promising directions in drug development.

Abstract Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials are designed and powered to detect the impact of a therapeutic intervention, and there has been considerable discussion on what constitutes a clinically meaningful change in those receiving treatment versus placebo. The pathology of AD is complex, beginning many years before clinical symptoms are detectable, with multiple potential opportunities for therapeutic engagement. Introducing treatment strategies early in the disease and assessing meaningful change over the course of an 18‐month clinical trial are critical to understanding the value to an effective intervention. With new clinical trial data expected soon on emerging therapeutics from several AD studies, the Alzheimer's Association convened a work group of experts to discuss key considerations for interpreting data from cognitive and functional measures and what is considered a clinically meaningful benefit or meaningful slowing of this fatal disease. Our expectations of outcomes from therapeutic interventions in AD may need to be modified.

AbstractBackgroundWe developed the Institute on Methods and Protocols for Advancement of Clinical Trials in ADRD (IMPACT‐AD) to address the shortage of qualified investigators with adequate training and expertise to conduct Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and AD Related Dementias (ADRD) clinical trials.MethodWe describe the experience of the first two years of funding of the IMPACT‐AD course, specifically the rates of applications to the course, descriptive summaries of the accepted trainees, and the measures of participant satisfaction and learning.ResultOver the first two years of the course, we received 195 eligible applications to the course. Most (n = 121, 62%) applicants were female and nearly half self‐reported as being African American/Black, Asian, or Pacific Islander race and/or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Forty‐one applicants (21%) indicated that they were the first in their family to attend collegeOf 69 total trainees accepted to the course (36% acceptance rate), a majority (n = 44, 64%) were female. Twenty‐eight (41%) self‐reported as being African American/Black, Asian, or Pacific Islander race and eleven (16%) were of Hispanic ethnicity. Fourteen trainees (20%) identified as being the first person in their family to attend college. Among trainees, 24 (35%) were MDs, 30 (43%) were PhDs, and 9 (13%) held master’s degrees.Course lecture topics were rated, on average, as “essential” or “valuable” by 98% of trainees. Across lecture topics, on average, 48% of trainees rated their prior knowledge of topics as “very strong” or “strong,” and 11% of trainees rated their prior knowledge as “weak.” Overall, 52% of trainees evaluated their change in knowledge based on the lectures as “very much increased,” 46% as “somewhat” or “slightly” increased, and 2% as “no change.” Results were similar for the two tracks. Based on pre‐ and post‐course assessments, trainees improved their knowledge of covered content (from 62% to 79% correct responses on knowledge assessments).ConclusionThe IMPACT‐AD course is achieving its mission of educating and diversifying the next generation of ADRD trialists.We thank Dr. Laurie Ryan and Dr. Kristina McLinden from the National Institute on Aging for their key contributions in leadership and scientific guidance of IMPACT‐AD.