OBJECTIVE: To characterize the shape of the trajectories of Alzheimer disease biomarkers as a function of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score. DESIGN AND SETTING: Longitudinal registries from the Mayo Clinic and the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. PATIENTS: Two different samples (n = 343 and n = 598) were created that spanned the cognitive spectrum from normal to Alzheimer disease dementia. Subgroup analyses were performed in members of both cohorts (n = 243 and n = 328) who were amyloid positive at baseline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The shape of biomarker trajectories as a function of MMSE score, adjusted for age, was modeled and described as baseline (cross-sectional) and within-subject longitudinal effects. Biomarkers evaluated were cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42 and tau levels, amyloid and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging, and structural magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Baseline biomarker values generally worsened (ie, nonzero slope) with lower baseline MMSE score. Baseline hippocampal volume, amyloid positron emission tomography, and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography values plateaued (ie, nonlinear slope) with lower MMSE score in 1 or more analyses. Longitudinally, within-subject rates of biomarker change were associated with worsening MMSE score. Nonconstant within-subject rates (deceleration) of biomarker change were found in only 1 model. CONCLUSIONS: Biomarker trajectory shapes by MMSE score were complex and were affected by interactions with age and APOE status. Nonlinearity was found in several baseline effects models. Nonconstant within-subject rates of biomarker change were found in only 1 model, likely owing to limited within-subject longitudinal follow-up. Creating reliable models that describe the full trajectories of Alzheimer disease biomarkers will require significant additional longitudinal data in individual participants.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the shape of the trajectories of Alzheimer disease biomarkers as a function of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score. DESIGN AND SETTING: Longitudinal registries from the Mayo Clinic and the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. PATIENTS: Two different samples (n = 343 and n = 598) were created that spanned the cognitive spectrum from normal to Alzheimer disease dementia. Subgroup analyses were performed in members of both cohorts (n = 243 and n = 328) who were amyloid positive at baseline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The shape of biomarker trajectories as a function of MMSE score, adjusted for age, was modeled and described as baseline (cross-sectional) and within-subject longitudinal effects. Biomarkers evaluated were cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42 and tau levels, amyloid and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging, and structural magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Baseline biomarker values generally worsened (ie, nonzero slope) with lower baseline MMSE score. Baseline hippocampal volume, amyloid positron emission tomography, and fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography values plateaued (ie, nonlinear slope) with lower MMSE score in 1 or more analyses. Longitudinally, within-subject rates of biomarker change were associated with worsening MMSE score. Nonconstant within-subject rates (deceleration) of biomarker change were found in only 1 model. CONCLUSIONS: Biomarker trajectory shapes by MMSE score were complex and were affected by interactions with age and APOE status. Nonlinearity was found in several baseline effects models. Nonconstant within-subject rates of biomarker change were found in only 1 model, likely owing to limited within-subject longitudinal follow-up. Creating reliable models that describe the full trajectories of Alzheimer disease biomarkers will require significant additional longitudinal data in individual participants.
Authors: Alex Crowe; Carlo Ballatore; Edward Hyde; John Q Trojanowski; Virginia M-Y Lee Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 2007-03-19 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Prashanthi Vemuri; Jennifer L Whitwell; Kejal Kantarci; Keith A Josephs; Joseph E Parisi; Maria S Shiung; David S Knopman; Bradley F Boeve; Ronald C Petersen; Dennis W Dickson; Clifford R Jack Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2008-05-20 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: C R Jack; S D Weigand; M M Shiung; S A Przybelski; P C O'Brien; J L Gunter; D S Knopman; B F Boeve; G E Smith; R C Petersen Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-11-21 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Clifford R Jack; Matt A Bernstein; Nick C Fox; Paul Thompson; Gene Alexander; Danielle Harvey; Bret Borowski; Paula J Britson; Jennifer L Whitwell; Chadwick Ward; Anders M Dale; Joel P Felmlee; Jeffrey L Gunter; Derek L G Hill; Ron Killiany; Norbert Schuff; Sabrina Fox-Bosetti; Chen Lin; Colin Studholme; Charles S DeCarli; Gunnar Krueger; Heidi A Ward; Gregory J Metzger; Katherine T Scott; Richard Mallozzi; Daniel Blezek; Joshua Levy; Josef P Debbins; Adam S Fleisher; Marilyn Albert; Robert Green; George Bartzokis; Gary Glover; John Mugler; Michael W Weiner Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: G Li; I Sokal; J F Quinn; J B Leverenz; M Brodey; G D Schellenberg; J A Kaye; M A Raskind; J Zhang; E R Peskind; T J Montine Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-08-14 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: G D Rabinovici; A J Furst; J P O'Neil; C A Racine; E C Mormino; S L Baker; S Chetty; P Patel; T A Pagliaro; W E Klunk; C A Mathis; H J Rosen; B L Miller; W J Jagust Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-04-10 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: C C Rowe; S Ng; U Ackermann; S J Gong; K Pike; G Savage; T F Cowie; K L Dickinson; P Maruff; D Darby; C Smith; M Woodward; J Merory; H Tochon-Danguy; G O'Keefe; W E Klunk; C A Mathis; J C Price; C L Masters; V L Villemagne Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-05-15 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Clifford R Jack; Val J Lowe; Matthew L Senjem; Stephen D Weigand; Bradley J Kemp; Maria M Shiung; David S Knopman; Bradley F Boeve; William E Klunk; Chester A Mathis; Ronald C Petersen Journal: Brain Date: 2008-02-07 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Rosebud O Roberts; Yonas E Geda; David S Knopman; Ruth H Cha; V Shane Pankratz; Bradley F Boeve; Robert J Ivnik; Eric G Tangalos; Ronald C Petersen; Walter A Rocca Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2008-02-07 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Karienn S Montgomery; George Edwards; Yona Levites; Ashok Kumar; Catherine E Myers; Mark A Gluck; Barry Setlow; Jennifer L Bizon Journal: Hippocampus Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 3.899
Authors: E Cavedo; S Lista; Z Khachaturian; P Aisen; P Amouyel; K Herholz; C R Jack; R Sperling; J Cummings; K Blennow; S O'Bryant; G B Frisoni; A Khachaturian; M Kivipelto; W Klunk; K Broich; S Andrieu; M Thiebaut de Schotten; J-F Mangin; A A Lammertsma; K Johnson; S Teipel; A Drzezga; A Bokde; O Colliot; H Bakardjian; H Zetterberg; B Dubois; B Vellas; L S Schneider; H Hampel Journal: J Prev Alzheimers Dis Date: 2014-12
Authors: Clifford R Jack; David S Knopman; William J Jagust; Ronald C Petersen; Michael W Weiner; Paul S Aisen; Leslie M Shaw; Prashanthi Vemuri; Heather J Wiste; Stephen D Weigand; Timothy G Lesnick; Vernon S Pankratz; Michael C Donohue; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Clifford R Jack; Heather J Wiste; Timothy G Lesnick; Stephen D Weigand; David S Knopman; Prashanthi Vemuri; Vernon S Pankratz; Matthew L Senjem; Jeffrey L Gunter; Michelle M Mielke; Val J Lowe; Bradley F Boeve; Ronald C Petersen Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-02-27 Impact factor: 9.910