OBJECTIVES: The current model of Alzheimer disease (AD) stipulates that brain amyloidosis biomarkers turn abnormal earliest, followed by cortical hypometabolism, and finally brain atrophy ones. The aim of this study is to provide clinical evidence of the model in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: A total of 73 patients with MCI from 3 European memory clinics were included. Brain amyloidosis was assessed by CSF Aβ42 concentration, cortical metabolism by an index of temporoparietal hypometabolism on FDG-PET, and brain atrophy by automated hippocampal volume. Patients were divided into groups based on biomarker positivity: 1) Aβ42- FDG-PET- Hippo-, 2) Aβ42+ FDG-PET- Hippo-, 3) Aβ42 + FDG-PET + Hippo-, 4) Aβ42 + FDG-PET+ Hippo+, and 5) any other combination not in line with the model. Measures of validity were prevalence of group 5, increasing incidence of progression to dementia with increasing biological severity, and decreasing conversion time. RESULTS: When patients with MCI underwent clinical follow-up, 29 progressed to dementia, while 44 remained stable. A total of 26% of patients were in group 5. Incident dementia was increasing with greater biological severity in groups 1 to 5 from 4% to 27%, 64%, and 100% (p for trend < 0.0001), and occurred increasingly earlier (p for trend = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: The core biomarker pattern is in line with the current pathophysiologic model of AD. Fully normal and fully abnormal pattern is associated with exceptional and universal development of dementia. Cases not in line might be due to atypical neurobiology or inaccurate thresholds for biomarker (ab)normality.
OBJECTIVES: The current model of Alzheimer disease (AD) stipulates that brain amyloidosis biomarkers turn abnormal earliest, followed by cortical hypometabolism, and finally brain atrophy ones. The aim of this study is to provide clinical evidence of the model in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: A total of 73 patients with MCI from 3 European memory clinics were included. Brain amyloidosis was assessed by CSF Aβ42 concentration, cortical metabolism by an index of temporoparietal hypometabolism on FDG-PET, and brain atrophy by automated hippocampal volume. Patients were divided into groups based on biomarker positivity: 1) Aβ42- FDG-PET- Hippo-, 2) Aβ42+ FDG-PET- Hippo-, 3) Aβ42 + FDG-PET + Hippo-, 4) Aβ42 + FDG-PET+ Hippo+, and 5) any other combination not in line with the model. Measures of validity were prevalence of group 5, increasing incidence of progression to dementia with increasing biological severity, and decreasing conversion time. RESULTS: When patients with MCI underwent clinical follow-up, 29 progressed to dementia, while 44 remained stable. A total of 26% of patients were in group 5. Incident dementia was increasing with greater biological severity in groups 1 to 5 from 4% to 27%, 64%, and 100% (p for trend < 0.0001), and occurred increasingly earlier (p for trend = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: The core biomarker pattern is in line with the current pathophysiologic model of AD. Fully normal and fully abnormal pattern is associated with exceptional and universal development of dementia. Cases not in line might be due to atypical neurobiology or inaccurate thresholds for biomarker (ab)normality.
Authors: Laura E M Wisse; Nirali Butala; Sandhitsu R Das; Christos Davatzikos; Bradford C Dickerson; Sanjeev N Vaishnavi; Paul A Yushkevich; David A Wolk Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2015-09-07 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Clifford R Jack; David S Knopman; Gaël Chételat; Dennis Dickson; Anne M Fagan; Giovanni B Frisoni; William Jagust; Elizabeth C Mormino; Ronald C Petersen; Reisa A Sperling; Wiesje M van der Flier; Victor L Villemagne; Pieter J Visser; Stephanie J B Vos Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2016-01-18 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: David A Wolk; Carl Sadowsky; Beth Safirstein; Juha O Rinne; Ranjan Duara; Richard Perry; Marc Agronin; Jose Gamez; Jiong Shi; Adrian Ivanoiu; Lennart Minthon; Zuzana Walker; Steen Hasselbalch; Clive Holmes; Marwan Sabbagh; Marilyn Albert; Adam Fleisher; Paul Loughlin; Eric Triau; Kirk Frey; Peter Høgh; Andrea Bozoki; Roger Bullock; Eric Salmon; Gillian Farrar; Christopher J Buckley; Michelle Zanette; Paul F Sherwin; Andrea Cherubini; Fraser Inglis Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Silvia Morbelli; Valentina Garibotto; Elsmarieke Van De Giessen; Javier Arbizu; Gaël Chételat; Alexander Drezgza; Swen Hesse; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Ian Law; Sabina Pappata'; Pierre Payoux; Marco Pagani Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Anna Caroli; Annapaola Prestia; Sara Wade; Kewei Chen; Napatkamon Ayutyanont; Susan M Landau; Cindee M Madison; Cathleen Haense; Karl Herholz; Eric M Reiman; William J Jagust; Giovanni B Frisoni Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2015 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Anna Caroli; Annapaola Prestia; Samantha Galluzzi; Clarissa Ferrari; Wiesje M van der Flier; Rik Ossenkoppele; Bart Van Berckel; Frederik Barkhof; Charlotte Teunissen; Anders E Wall; Stephen F Carter; Michael Schöll; Il Han Choo; Timo Grimmer; Alberto Redolfi; Agneta Nordberg; Philip Scheltens; Alexander Drzezga; Giovanni B Frisoni Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-01-07 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Yujing Zhao; Dana L Tudorascu; Oscar L Lopez; Ann D Cohen; Chester A Mathis; Howard J Aizenstein; Julie C Price; Lewis H Kuller; M Ilyas Kamboh; Steven T DeKosky; William E Klunk; Beth E Snitz Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2018-01-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: David S Knopman; Clifford R Jack; Emily S Lundt; Stephen D Weigand; Prashanthi Vemuri; Val J Lowe; Kejal Kantarci; Jeffrey L Gunter; Matthew L Senjem; Michelle M Mielke; Mary M Machulda; Rosebud O Roberts; Bradley F Boeve; David T Jones; Ronald C Petersen Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 4.673