Mona Haghighi1, Amanda Smith2, Dave Morgan2, Brent Small3, Shuai Huang4. 1. Department of Industrial and Management Systems Engineering, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA. 2. Byrd Alzheimer's Institute, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA. 3. School of Aging Studies, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA. 4. Department of Industrial and Management Systems Engineering, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA Byrd Alzheimer's Institute, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Detecting participants who are positive for amyloid-β (Aβ) pathology is germane in designing prevention trials by enriching for those cases that are more likely to be amyloid positive. Existing brain amyloid measurement techniques, such as the Pittsburgh Compound B-positron emission tomography and cerebrospinal fluid, are not reasonable first-line approaches limited by either feasibility or cost. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify simple and cost-effective rules that can predict brain Aβ level by integrating both neuropsychological measurements and blood-based markers. METHOD: Several decision tree models were built for extracting the predictive rules based on the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort. RESULTS: We successfully extracted predictive rules of Aβ level. For cognitive function variables, cases above the 45th percentile in total cognitive score (TOTALMOD), above the 52nd percentile of delayed word recall, and above the 70th percentile in orientation resulted in a group that was highly enriched for amyloid negative cases. Conversely scoring below the 15th percentile of TOTALMOD resulted in a group highly enriched for amyloid positive cases. For blood protein markers, scoring below the 57th percentile for apolipoprotein E (ApoE) levels (irrespective of genotype) enriched two fold for the risk of being amyloid positive. In the high ApoE cases, scoring above the 60th percentile for transthyretin resulted in a group that was >90% amyloid negative. A third decision tree using both cognitive and blood-marker data slightly improved the classification of cases. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the integration of the neuropsychological measurements and blood-based markers significantly improved prediction accuracy. The prediction model has led to several simple rules, which have a great potential of being naturally translated into clinical settings such as enrichment screening for AD prevention trials of anti-amyloid treatments.
BACKGROUND: Detecting participants who are positive for amyloid-β (Aβ) pathology is germane in designing prevention trials by enriching for those cases that are more likely to be amyloid positive. Existing brain amyloid measurement techniques, such as the Pittsburgh Compound B-positron emission tomography and cerebrospinal fluid, are not reasonable first-line approaches limited by either feasibility or cost. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify simple and cost-effective rules that can predict brain Aβ level by integrating both neuropsychological measurements and blood-based markers. METHOD: Several decision tree models were built for extracting the predictive rules based on the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort. RESULTS: We successfully extracted predictive rules of Aβ level. For cognitive function variables, cases above the 45th percentile in total cognitive score (TOTALMOD), above the 52nd percentile of delayed word recall, and above the 70th percentile in orientation resulted in a group that was highly enriched for amyloid negative cases. Conversely scoring below the 15th percentile of TOTALMOD resulted in a group highly enriched for amyloid positive cases. For blood protein markers, scoring below the 57th percentile for apolipoprotein E (ApoE) levels (irrespective of genotype) enriched two fold for the risk of being amyloid positive. In the high ApoE cases, scoring above the 60th percentile for transthyretin resulted in a group that was >90% amyloid negative. A third decision tree using both cognitive and blood-marker data slightly improved the classification of cases. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the integration of the neuropsychological measurements and blood-based markers significantly improved prediction accuracy. The prediction model has led to several simple rules, which have a great potential of being naturally translated into clinical settings such as enrichment screening for AD prevention trials of anti-amyloid treatments.
Authors: Ali Ezzati; Danielle J Harvey; Christian Habeck; Ashkan Golzar; Irfan A Qureshi; Andrea R Zammit; Jinshil Hyun; Monica Truelove-Hill; Charles B Hall; Christos Davatzikos; Richard B Lipton Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2020 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Rinko Grewal; Mona Haghighi; Shuai Huang; Amanda G Smith; Chuanhai Cao; Xiaoyang Lin; Daniel C Lee; Nancy Teten; Angela M Hill; Maj-Linda B Selenica Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Jun Ho Lee; Min Soo Byun; Dahyun Yi; Bo Kyung Sohn; So Yeon Jeon; Younghwa Lee; Jun-Young Lee; Yu Kyeong Kim; Yun-Sang Lee; Dong Young Lee Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Sebastian Palmqvist; Philip S Insel; Henrik Zetterberg; Kaj Blennow; Britta Brix; Erik Stomrud; Niklas Mattsson; Oskar Hansson Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 21.566