Chenjie Xia1, Sara J Makaretz1, Christina Caso1, Scott McGinnis1, Stephen N Gomperts2, Jorge Sepulcre3, Teresa Gomez-Isla2, Bradley T Hyman2, Aaron Schultz4, Neil Vasdev3, Keith A Johnson5, Bradford C Dickerson6. 1. Frontotemporal Disorders Unit, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown. 2. Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown. 3. Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston. 4. Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston4Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown. 5. Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown3Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston5Center for Alzheimer Research and Treatment, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Frontotemporal Disorders Unit, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown2Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown4Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown.
Abstract
Importance: Previous postmortem studies have long demonstrated that neurofibrillary tangles made of hyperphosphorylated tau proteins are closely associated with Alzheimer disease clinical phenotype and neurodegeneration pattern. Validating these associations in vivo will lead to new diagnostic tools for Alzheimer disease and better understanding of its neurobiology. Objective: To examine whether topographical distribution and severity of hyperphosphorylated tau pathologic findings measured by fluorine 18-labeled AV-1451 ([18F]AV-1451) positron emission tomographic (PET) imaging are linked with clinical phenotype and cortical atrophy in patients with Alzheimer disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational case series, conducted from July 1, 2012, to July 30, 2015, in an outpatient referral center for patients with neurodegenerative diseases, included 6 patients: 3 with typical amnesic Alzheimer disease and 3 with atypical variants (posterior cortical atrophy, logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia, and corticobasal syndrome). Patients underwent [18F]AV-1451 PET imaging to measure tau burden, carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh Compound B ([11C]PiB) PET imaging to measure amyloid burden, and structural magnetic resonance imaging to measure cortical thickness. Seventy-seven age-matched controls with normal cognitive function also underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging but not tau or amyloid PET imaging. Main Outcomes and Measures: Tau burden, amyloid burden, and cortical thickness. Results: In all 6 patients (3 women and 3 men; mean age 61.8 years), the underlying clinical phenotype was associated with the regional distribution of the [18F]AV-1451 signal. Furthermore, within 68 cortical regions of interest measured from each patient, the magnitude of cortical atrophy was strongly correlated with the magnitude of [18F]AV-1451 binding (3 patients with amnesic Alzheimer disease, r = -0.82; P < .001; r = -0.70; P < .001; r = -0.58; P < .001; and 3 patients with nonamnesic Alzheimer disease, r = -0.51; P < .001; r = -0.63; P < .001; r = -0.70; P < .001), but not of [11C]PiB binding. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings provide further in vivo evidence that distribution of the [18F]AV-1451 signal as seen on results of PET imaging is a valid marker of clinical symptoms and neurodegeneration. By localizing and quantifying hyperphosphorylated tau in vivo, results of tau PET imaging will likely serve as a key biomarker that links a specific type of molecular Alzheimer disease neuropathologic condition with clinically significant neurodegeneration, which will likely catalyze additional efforts to develop disease-modifying therapeutics.
Importance: Previous postmortem studies have long demonstrated that neurofibrillary tangles made of hyperphosphorylated tau proteins are closely associated with Alzheimer disease clinical phenotype and neurodegeneration pattern. Validating these associations in vivo will lead to new diagnostic tools for Alzheimer disease and better understanding of its neurobiology. Objective: To examine whether topographical distribution and severity of hyperphosphorylated tau pathologic findings measured by fluorine 18-labeled AV-1451 ([18F]AV-1451) positron emission tomographic (PET) imaging are linked with clinical phenotype and cortical atrophy in patients with Alzheimer disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational case series, conducted from July 1, 2012, to July 30, 2015, in an outpatient referral center for patients with neurodegenerative diseases, included 6 patients: 3 with typical amnesic Alzheimer disease and 3 with atypical variants (posterior cortical atrophy, logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia, and corticobasal syndrome). Patients underwent [18F]AV-1451 PET imaging to measure tau burden, carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh Compound B ([11C]PiB) PET imaging to measure amyloid burden, and structural magnetic resonance imaging to measure cortical thickness. Seventy-seven age-matched controls with normal cognitive function also underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging but not tau or amyloid PET imaging. Main Outcomes and Measures: Tau burden, amyloid burden, and cortical thickness. Results: In all 6 patients (3 women and 3 men; mean age 61.8 years), the underlying clinical phenotype was associated with the regional distribution of the [18F]AV-1451 signal. Furthermore, within 68 cortical regions of interest measured from each patient, the magnitude of cortical atrophy was strongly correlated with the magnitude of [18F]AV-1451 binding (3 patients with amnesic Alzheimer disease, r = -0.82; P < .001; r = -0.70; P < .001; r = -0.58; P < .001; and 3 patients with nonamnesic Alzheimer disease, r = -0.51; P < .001; r = -0.63; P < .001; r = -0.70; P < .001), but not of [11C]PiB binding. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings provide further in vivo evidence that distribution of the [18F]AV-1451 signal as seen on results of PET imaging is a valid marker of clinical symptoms and neurodegeneration. By localizing and quantifying hyperphosphorylated tau in vivo, results of tau PET imaging will likely serve as a key biomarker that links a specific type of molecular Alzheimer disease neuropathologic condition with clinically significant neurodegeneration, which will likely catalyze additional efforts to develop disease-modifying therapeutics.
Authors: M L Gorno-Tempini; A E Hillis; S Weintraub; A Kertesz; M Mendez; S F Cappa; J M Ogar; J D Rohrer; S Black; B F Boeve; F Manes; N F Dronkers; R Vandenberghe; K Rascovsky; K Patterson; B L Miller; D S Knopman; J R Hodges; M M Mesulam; M Grossman Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-02-16 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: J Logan; J S Fowler; N D Volkow; A P Wolf; S L Dewey; D J Schlyer; R R MacGregor; R Hitzemann; B Bendriem; S J Gatley Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 1990-09 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Peter T Nelson; Irina Alafuzoff; Eileen H Bigio; Constantin Bouras; Heiko Braak; Nigel J Cairns; Rudolph J Castellani; Barbara J Crain; Peter Davies; Kelly Del Tredici; Charles Duyckaerts; Matthew P Frosch; Vahram Haroutunian; Patrick R Hof; Christine M Hulette; Bradley T Hyman; Takeshi Iwatsubo; Kurt A Jellinger; Gregory A Jicha; Enikö Kövari; Walter A Kukull; James B Leverenz; Seth Love; Ian R Mackenzie; David M Mann; Eliezer Masliah; Ann C McKee; Thomas J Montine; John C Morris; Julie A Schneider; Joshua A Sonnen; Dietmar R Thal; John Q Trojanowski; Juan C Troncoso; Thomas Wisniewski; Randall L Woltjer; Thomas G Beach Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Leslie M Shaw; Hugo Vanderstichele; Malgorzata Knapik-Czajka; Christopher M Clark; Paul S Aisen; Ronald C Petersen; Kaj Blennow; Holly Soares; Adam Simon; Piotr Lewczuk; Robert Dean; Eric Siemers; William Potter; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: L C Silbert; J F Quinn; M M Moore; E Corbridge; M J Ball; G Murdoch; G Sexton; J A Kaye Journal: Neurology Date: 2003-08-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Keith A Johnson; Aaron Schultz; Rebecca A Betensky; J Alex Becker; Jorge Sepulcre; Dorene Rentz; Elizabeth Mormino; Jasmeer Chhatwal; Rebecca Amariglio; Kate Papp; Gad Marshall; Mark Albers; Samantha Mauro; Lesley Pepin; Jonathan Alverio; Kelly Judge; Marlie Philiossaint; Timothy Shoup; Daniel Yokell; Bradford Dickerson; Teresa Gomez-Isla; Bradley Hyman; Neil Vasdev; Reisa Sperling Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2015-12-15 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: J Alex Becker; Trey Hedden; Jeremy Carmasin; Jacqueline Maye; Dorene M Rentz; Deepti Putcha; Bruce Fischl; Douglas N Greve; Gad A Marshall; Stephen Salloway; Donald Marks; Randy L Buckner; Reisa A Sperling; Keith A Johnson Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-03-17 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Atsushi Aoyagi; Carlo Condello; Jan Stöhr; Weizhou Yue; Brianna M Rivera; Joanne C Lee; Amanda L Woerman; Glenda Halliday; Sjoerd van Duinen; Martin Ingelsson; Lars Lannfelt; Caroline Graff; Thomas D Bird; C Dirk Keene; William W Seeley; William F DeGrado; Stanley B Prusiner Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Anna E Goodheart; Joseph J Locascio; Wesley R Samore; Jessica A Collins; Michael Brickhouse; Aaron Schultz; Alexandra Touroutoglou; Keith A Johnson; Matthew P Frosch; John H Growdon; Bradford C Dickerson; Stephen N Gomperts Journal: Brain Date: 2021-02-12 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Sandhitsu R Das; Long Xie; Laura E M Wisse; Ranjit Ittyerah; Nicholas J Tustison; Bradford C Dickerson; Paul A Yushkevich; David A Wolk Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2018-02-09 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: F Ali; J L Whitwell; P R Martin; M L Senjem; D S Knopman; C R Jack; V J Lowe; R C Petersen; B F Boeve; K A Josephs Journal: J Neurol Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 4.849