Bradford C Dickerson1, David A Wolk. 1. Frontotemporal Dementia Unit, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, and Athinoula A Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.bradd@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: New preclinical Alzheimer disease (AD) diagnostic criteria have been developed using biomarkers in cognitively normal (CN) adults. We implemented these criteria using an MRI biomarker previously associated with AD dementia, testing the hypothesis that individuals at high risk for preclinical AD would be at elevated risk for cognitive decline. METHODS: The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database was interrogated for CN individuals. MRI data were processed using a published set of a priori regions of interest to derive a single measure known as the AD signature (ADsig). Each individual was classified as ADsig-low (≥ 1 SD below the mean: high risk for preclinical AD), ADsig-average (within 1 SD of mean), or ADsig-high (≥ 1 SD above mean). A 3-year cognitive decline outcome was defined a priori using change in Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes and selected neuropsychological measures. RESULTS: Individuals at high risk for preclinical AD were more likely to experience cognitive decline, which developed in 21% compared with 7% of ADsig-average and 0% of ADsig-high groups (p = 0.03). Logistic regression demonstrated that every 1 SD of cortical thinning was associated with a nearly tripled risk of cognitive decline (p = 0.02). Of those for whom baseline CSF data were available, 60% of the high risk for preclinical AD group had CSF characteristics consistent with AD while 36% of the ADsig-average and 19% of the ADsig-high groups had such CSF characteristics (p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: This approach to the detection of individuals at high risk for preclinical AD-identified in single CN individuals using this quantitative ADsig MRI biomarker-may provide investigators with a population enriched for AD pathobiology and with a relatively high likelihood of imminent cognitive decline consistent with prodromal AD.
OBJECTIVE: New preclinical Alzheimer disease (AD) diagnostic criteria have been developed using biomarkers in cognitively normal (CN) adults. We implemented these criteria using an MRI biomarker previously associated with AD dementia, testing the hypothesis that individuals at high risk for preclinical AD would be at elevated risk for cognitive decline. METHODS: The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database was interrogated for CN individuals. MRI data were processed using a published set of a priori regions of interest to derive a single measure known as the AD signature (ADsig). Each individual was classified as ADsig-low (≥ 1 SD below the mean: high risk for preclinical AD), ADsig-average (within 1 SD of mean), or ADsig-high (≥ 1 SD above mean). A 3-year cognitive decline outcome was defined a priori using change in Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes and selected neuropsychological measures. RESULTS: Individuals at high risk for preclinical AD were more likely to experience cognitive decline, which developed in 21% compared with 7% of ADsig-average and 0% of ADsig-high groups (p = 0.03). Logistic regression demonstrated that every 1 SD of cortical thinning was associated with a nearly tripled risk of cognitive decline (p = 0.02). Of those for whom baseline CSF data were available, 60% of the high risk for preclinical AD group had CSF characteristics consistent with AD while 36% of the ADsig-average and 19% of the ADsig-high groups had such CSF characteristics (p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: This approach to the detection of individuals at high risk for preclinical AD-identified in single CN individuals using this quantitative ADsig MRI biomarker-may provide investigators with a population enriched for AD pathobiology and with a relatively high likelihood of imminent cognitive decline consistent with prodromal AD.
Authors: Bradford C Dickerson; David H Salat; Julianna F Bates; Monika Atiya; Ronald J Killiany; Douglas N Greve; Anders M Dale; Chantal E Stern; Deborah Blacker; Marilyn S Albert; Reisa A Sperling Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: N C Fox; E K Warrington; P A Freeborough; P Hartikainen; A M Kennedy; J M Stevens; M N Rossor Journal: Brain Date: 1996-12 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: H Crystal; D Dickson; P Fuld; D Masur; R Scott; M Mehler; J Masdeu; C Kawas; M Aronson; L Wolfson Journal: Neurology Date: 1988-11 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jonathan M Schott; Nick C Fox; Chris Frost; Rachael I Scahill; John C Janssen; Dennis Chan; Rhian Jenkins; Martin N Rossor Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Michael L Alosco; John Gunstad; Xiaomeng Xu; Uraina S Clark; Donald R Labbe; Hannah H Riskin-Jones; Gretel Terrero; Nicolette F Schwarz; Edward G Walsh; Athena Poppas; Ronald A Cohen; Lawrence H Sweet Journal: J Am Soc Hypertens Date: 2014-04-13
Authors: Debra A Fleischman; Sue Leurgans; Konstantinos Arfanakis; Zoe Arvanitakis; Lisa L Barnes; Patricia A Boyle; S Duke Han; David A Bennett Journal: Brain Struct Funct Date: 2013-08-17 Impact factor: 3.270
Authors: Inga K Koerte; Alexander P Lin; Anna Willems; Marc Muehlmann; Jakob Hufschmidt; Michael J Coleman; Isobel Green; Huijun Liao; David F Tate; Elisabeth A Wilde; Ofer Pasternak; Sylvain Bouix; Yogesh Rathi; Erin D Bigler; Robert A Stern; Martha E Shenton Journal: Brain Pathol Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 6.508
Authors: Jennifer Pacheco; Joshua O Goh; Michael A Kraut; Luigi Ferrucci; Susan M Resnick Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2014-09-06 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Miranka Wirth; Cindee M Madison; Gil D Rabinovici; Hwamee Oh; Susan M Landau; William J Jagust Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2013-03-27 Impact factor: 6.167