Ronald C Petersen1, Heather J Wiste2, Stephen D Weigand2, Walter A Rocca1, Rosebud O Roberts1, Michelle M Mielke2, Val J Lowe3, David S Knopman4, Vernon S Pankratz5, Mary M Machulda6, Yonas E Geda6, Clifford R Jack3. 1. Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota2Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota. 2. Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota. 3. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota. 4. Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque. 6. Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: The role of amyloid in the progression of Alzheimer disease (AD) pathophysiology is of central interest to the design of randomized clinical trials. The presence of amyloid has become a prerequisite for enrollment in several secondary prevention trials for AD, yet the precise effect of elevated amyloid levels on subsequent clinical and biomarker events is less certain. OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of elevated amyloid levels on subsequent changes in cognition and biomarkers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 564 cognitively normal individuals (median age, 78 years) from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging, a population-based longitudinal study in Olmsted County, Minnesota, with serial cognitive data were selected for this study. The data used in this study were collected from January 12, 2006, to January 9, 2014. Individuals included in this study had undergone magnetic resonance imaging, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), and Pittsburgh Compound B (PiB) PET at baseline were not cognitively impaired at baseline and had at least 1 clinical follow-up. A subset of 286 individuals also underwent serial imaging. Elevated amyloid level was defined as a standardized uptake value ratio of greater than 1.5 on PiB PET. Associations with baseline amyloid status and baseline and longitudinal change in clinical and imaging measures were evaluated after adjusting for age and hippocampal volume. APOE4 effects were also evaluated. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Cognitive measures of memory, language, attention/executive function, visuospatial skills, PiB levels, hippocampal and ventricular volumes, and FDG-PET measures. RESULTS: At baseline, 179 (31.7%) individuals with elevated amyloid levels had poorer cognition in all domains measured, reduced hippocampal volume, and greater FDG-PET hypometabolism. Elevated amyloid levels at baseline were associated with a greater rate of cognitive decline in all domains (0.04 to 0.09 z score units per year) except language and a greater rate of amyloid accumulation (1.6% per year), hippocampal atrophy (30 mm3 per year), and ventricular enlargement (565 mm3 per year). Elevated amyloid levels were also associated with an increased risk of mild cognitive impairment (hazard ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.7-5.0, and hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.9-2.8, for PiB+ APOE4 carriers and PiB+ noncarriers, respectively, compared with PiB- noncarriers). These associations were largely independent of APOE4. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In persons selected from a population-based study, elevated amyloid levels at baseline were associated with worse cognition and imaging biomarkers at baseline and with greater clinical decline and neurodegeneration. These results have implications for the design of randomized clinical trials for AD.
IMPORTANCE: The role of amyloid in the progression of Alzheimer disease (AD) pathophysiology is of central interest to the design of randomized clinical trials. The presence of amyloid has become a prerequisite for enrollment in several secondary prevention trials for AD, yet the precise effect of elevated amyloid levels on subsequent clinical and biomarker events is less certain. OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of elevated amyloid levels on subsequent changes in cognition and biomarkers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 564 cognitively normal individuals (median age, 78 years) from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging, a population-based longitudinal study in Olmsted County, Minnesota, with serial cognitive data were selected for this study. The data used in this study were collected from January 12, 2006, to January 9, 2014. Individuals included in this study had undergone magnetic resonance imaging, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), and Pittsburgh Compound B (PiB) PET at baseline were not cognitively impaired at baseline and had at least 1 clinical follow-up. A subset of 286 individuals also underwent serial imaging. Elevated amyloid level was defined as a standardized uptake value ratio of greater than 1.5 on PiB PET. Associations with baseline amyloid status and baseline and longitudinal change in clinical and imaging measures were evaluated after adjusting for age and hippocampal volume. APOE4 effects were also evaluated. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Cognitive measures of memory, language, attention/executive function, visuospatial skills, PiB levels, hippocampal and ventricular volumes, and FDG-PET measures. RESULTS: At baseline, 179 (31.7%) individuals with elevated amyloid levels had poorer cognition in all domains measured, reduced hippocampal volume, and greater FDG-PET hypometabolism. Elevated amyloid levels at baseline were associated with a greater rate of cognitive decline in all domains (0.04 to 0.09 z score units per year) except language and a greater rate of amyloid accumulation (1.6% per year), hippocampal atrophy (30 mm3 per year), and ventricular enlargement (565 mm3 per year). Elevated amyloid levels were also associated with an increased risk of mild cognitive impairment (hazard ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.7-5.0, and hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.9-2.8, for PiB+ APOE4 carriers and PiB+ noncarriers, respectively, compared with PiB- noncarriers). These associations were largely independent of APOE4. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In persons selected from a population-based study, elevated amyloid levels at baseline were associated with worse cognition and imaging biomarkers at baseline and with greater clinical decline and neurodegeneration. These results have implications for the design of randomized clinical trials for AD.
Authors: G Chételat; V L Villemagne; N Villain; G Jones; K A Ellis; D Ames; R N Martins; C L Masters; C C Rowe Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: E C Mormino; J T Kluth; C M Madison; G D Rabinovici; S L Baker; B L Miller; R A Koeppe; C A Mathis; M W Weiner; W J Jagust Journal: Brain Date: 2008-11-28 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Gaël Chételat; Victor L Villemagne; Kerryn E Pike; Kathryn A Ellis; Pierrick Bourgeat; Gareth Jones; Graeme J O'Keefe; Olivier Salvado; Cassandra Szoeke; Ralph N Martins; David Ames; Colin L Masters; Christopher C Rowe Journal: Brain Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: K Kantarci; V Lowe; S A Przybelski; S D Weigand; M L Senjem; R J Ivnik; G M Preboske; R Roberts; Y E Geda; B F Boeve; D S Knopman; R C Petersen; C R Jack Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-12-21 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Victor L Villemagne; Samantha Burnham; Pierrick Bourgeat; Belinda Brown; Kathryn A Ellis; Olivier Salvado; Cassandra Szoeke; S Lance Macaulay; Ralph Martins; Paul Maruff; David Ames; Christopher C Rowe; Colin L Masters Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2013-03-08 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Miranka Wirth; Sylvia Villeneuve; Claudia M Haase; Cindee M Madison; Hwamee Oh; Susan M Landau; Gil D Rabinovici; William J Jagust Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Gaël Chételat; Renaud La Joie; Nicolas Villain; Audrey Perrotin; Vincent de La Sayette; Francis Eustache; Rik Vandenberghe Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2013-03-05 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Clifford R Jack; Heather J Wiste; David S Knopman; Prashanthi Vemuri; Michelle M Mielke; Stephen D Weigand; Matthew L Senjem; Jeffrey L Gunter; Val Lowe; Brian E Gregg; Vernon S Pankratz; Ronald C Petersen Journal: Neurology Date: 2014-04-04 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: David S Knopman; Samantha Budd Haeberlein; Maria C Carrillo; James A Hendrix; Geoff Kerchner; Richard Margolin; Paul Maruff; David S Miller; Gary Tong; Maria B Tome; Melissa E Murray; Peter T Nelson; Mary Sano; Niklas Mattsson; David L Sultzer; Thomas J Montine; Clifford R Jack; Hartmuth Kolb; Ronald C Petersen; Prashanthi Vemuri; Megan Zoschg Canniere; Julie A Schneider; Susan M Resnick; Gary Romano; Argonde Corien van Harten; David A Wolk; Lisa J Bain; Eric Siemers Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Neelesh K Nadkarni; Oscar L Lopez; Subashan Perera; Stephanie A Studenski; Beth E Snitz; Kirk I Erickson; Chester A Mathis; Robert D Nebes; Mark Redfern; William E Klunk Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Stefanie Schreiber; Frank Schreiber; Samuel N Lockhart; Andy Horng; Alexandre Bejanin; Susan M Landau; William J Jagust Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Jennifer S Rabin; Rodrigo D Perea; Rachel F Buckley; Taylor E Neal; Randy L Buckner; Keith A Johnson; Reisa A Sperling; Trey Hedden Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Murat Bilgel; Yang An; Jessica Helphrey; Wendy Elkins; Gabriela Gomez; Dean F Wong; Christos Davatzikos; Luigi Ferrucci; Susan M Resnick Journal: Brain Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Lidia Sarro; Matthew L Senjem; Emily S Lundt; Scott A Przybelski; Timothy G Lesnick; Jonathan Graff-Radford; Bradley F Boeve; Val J Lowe; Tanis J Ferman; David S Knopman; Giancarlo Comi; Massimo Filippi; Ronald C Petersen; Clifford R Jack; Kejal Kantarci Journal: Brain Date: 2016-07-24 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: David C Hsu; Elizabeth C Mormino; Aaron P Schultz; Rebecca E Amariglio; Nancy J Donovan; Dorene M Rentz; Keith A Johnson; Reisa A Sperling; Gad A Marshall Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2016-06-18 Impact factor: 4.472