David T Jones1, David S Knopman2, Jonathan Graff-Radford2, Jeremy A Syrjanen2, Matthew L Senjem2, Christopher G Schwarz2, Christina Dheel2, Zbigniew Wszolek2, Rosa Rademakers2, Kejal Kantarci2, Ronald C Petersen2, Clifford R Jack2, Val J Lowe2, Bradley F Boeve2. 1. From the Departments of Neurology (D.T.J., D.S.K., J.G.-R., C.D., R.C.P., B.F.B.), Radiology (D.T.J., C.G.S., K.K., C.R.J., V.J.L.), Health Sciences Research (J.A.S.), and Information Technology (M.L.S.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; and Departments of Neurology (Z.W.) and Neuroscience (R.R.), Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. jones.david@mayo.edu. 2. From the Departments of Neurology (D.T.J., D.S.K., J.G.-R., C.D., R.C.P., B.F.B.), Radiology (D.T.J., C.G.S., K.K., C.R.J., V.J.L.), Health Sciences Research (J.A.S.), and Information Technology (M.L.S.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; and Departments of Neurology (Z.W.) and Neuroscience (R.R.), Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 18F-AV-1451 tau PET binding among microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT) mutation carriers. METHODS: Using a case-control study, we quantitatively and qualitatively compared tau PET scans in 10 symptomatic and 3 asymptomatic MAPT mutation carriers (n = 13, age range 42-67 years) with clinically normal (CN) participants (n = 241, age range 42-67 years) and an Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia cohort (n = 30, age range 52-67 years). Eight participants had MAPT mutations that involved exon 10 (N279K n = 5, S305N n = 2, P301L n = 1) and tend to form 4R tau pathology, and 5 had mutations outside exon 10 (V337M n = 2, R406W n = 3) and tend to form mixed 3R/4R tau pathology. RESULTS: Tau PET signal was qualitatively and quantitatively different between participants with AD, CN participants, and MAPT mutation carriers, with the greatest signal intensity in those with AD and minimal regional signal in MAPT mutation carries with mutations in exon 10. However, MAPT mutation carriers with mutations outside exon 10 had uptake levels within the AD range, which was significantly higher than both MAPT mutation carriers with mutations in exon 10 and controls. CONCLUSIONS: Tau PET shows higher magnitude of binding in MAPT mutation carriers who harbor mutations that are more likely to produce AD-like tau pathology (e.g., in our series, the non-exon 10 families tend to accumulate mixed 3R/4R aggregates). Exon 10 splicing determines the balance of 3R and 4R tau isoforms, with some mutations involving exon 10 predisposing to a greater proportion of 4R aggregates and consequently a lower level of AV-1451 binding, as seen in this case series, thus supporting the notion that this tau PET ligand has specific binding properties for AD-like tau pathology.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 18F-AV-1451 tau PET binding among microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT) mutation carriers. METHODS: Using a case-control study, we quantitatively and qualitatively compared tau PET scans in 10 symptomatic and 3 asymptomatic MAPT mutation carriers (n = 13, age range 42-67 years) with clinically normal (CN) participants (n = 241, age range 42-67 years) and an Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia cohort (n = 30, age range 52-67 years). Eight participants had MAPT mutations that involved exon 10 (N279K n = 5, S305N n = 2, P301L n = 1) and tend to form 4R tau pathology, and 5 had mutations outside exon 10 (V337M n = 2, R406W n = 3) and tend to form mixed 3R/4R tau pathology. RESULTS: Tau PET signal was qualitatively and quantitatively different between participants with AD, CN participants, and MAPT mutation carriers, with the greatest signal intensity in those with AD and minimal regional signal in MAPT mutation carries with mutations in exon 10. However, MAPT mutation carriers with mutations outside exon 10 had uptake levels within the AD range, which was significantly higher than both MAPT mutation carriers with mutations in exon 10 and controls. CONCLUSIONS: Tau PET shows higher magnitude of binding in MAPT mutation carriers who harbor mutations that are more likely to produce AD-like tau pathology (e.g., in our series, the non-exon 10 families tend to accumulate mixed 3R/4R aggregates). Exon 10 splicing determines the balance of 3R and 4R tau isoforms, with some mutations involving exon 10 predisposing to a greater proportion of 4R aggregates and consequently a lower level of AV-1451 binding, as seen in this case series, thus supporting the notion that this tau PET ligand has specific binding properties for AD-like tau pathology.
Authors: M Iijima; T Tabira; P Poorkaj; G D Schellenberg; J Q Trojanowski; V M Lee; M L Schmidt; K Takahashi; T Nabika; T Matsumoto; Y Yamashita; S Yoshioka; H Ishino Journal: Neuroreport Date: 1999-02-25 Impact factor: 1.837
Authors: Chun-Fang Xia; Janna Arteaga; Gang Chen; Umesh Gangadharmath; Luis F Gomez; Dhanalakshmi Kasi; Chung Lam; Qianwa Liang; Changhui Liu; Vani P Mocharla; Fanrong Mu; Anjana Sinha; Helen Su; A Katrin Szardenings; Joseph C Walsh; Eric Wang; Chul Yu; Wei Zhang; Tieming Zhao; Hartmuth C Kolb Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2013-02-12 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Keith A Josephs; Jennifer L Whitwell; Pawel Tacik; Joseph R Duffy; Matthew L Senjem; Nirubol Tosakulwong; Clifford R Jack; Val Lowe; Dennis W Dickson; Melissa E Murray Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2016-09-19 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: S S Mirra; J R Murrell; M Gearing; M G Spillantini; M Goedert; R A Crowther; A I Levey; R Jones; J Green; J M Shoffner; B H Wainer; M L Schmidt; J Q Trojanowski; B Ghetti Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Jennifer L Whitwell; Val J Lowe; Nirubol Tosakulwong; Stephen D Weigand; Matthew L Senjem; Christopher G Schwarz; Anthony J Spychalla; Ronald C Petersen; Clifford R Jack; Keith A Josephs Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Z K Wszolek; R F Pfeiffer; M H Bhatt; R L Schelper; M Cordes; B J Snow; R L Rodnitzky; E C Wolters; F Arwert; D B Calne Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1992-09 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Salvatore Spina; Daniel R Schonhaut; Bradley F Boeve; William W Seeley; Rik Ossenkoppele; James P O'Neil; Andreas Lazaris; Howard J Rosen; Adam L Boxer; David C Perry; Bruce L Miller; Dennis W Dickson; Joseph E Parisi; William J Jagust; Melissa E Murray; Gil D Rabinovici Journal: Neurology Date: 2017-01-27 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Ruben Smith; Andreas Puschmann; Michael Schöll; Tomas Ohlsson; John van Swieten; Michael Honer; Elisabet Englund; Oskar Hansson Journal: Brain Date: 2016-06-29 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Allan McCarthy; Roisin Lonergan; Diana A Olszewska; Sean O'Dowd; Gemma Cummins; Brian Magennis; Emer M Fallon; Niall Pender; Edward D Huey; Stephanie Cosentino; Killian O'Rourke; Brendan D Kelly; Martin O'Connell; Isabelle Delon; Michael Farrell; Maria Grazia Spillantini; Lewis P Rowland; Stanley Fahn; Peter Craig; Michael Hutton; Tim Lynch Journal: Brain Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Val J Lowe; Geoffry Curran; Ping Fang; Amanda M Liesinger; Keith A Josephs; Joseph E Parisi; Kejal Kantarci; Bradley F Boeve; Mukesh K Pandey; Tyler Bruinsma; David S Knopman; David T Jones; Leonard Petrucelli; Casey N Cook; Neill R Graff-Radford; Dennis W Dickson; Ronald C Petersen; Clifford R Jack; Melissa E Murray Journal: Acta Neuropathol Commun Date: 2016-06-13 Impact factor: 7.801
Authors: Firat Kara; James M Joers; Dinesh K Deelchand; Young Woo Park; Scott A Przybelski; Timothy G Lesnick; Matthew L Senjem; Burcu Zeydan; David S Knopman; Val J Lowe; Prashanthi Vemuri; Michelle M Mielke; Mary M Machulda; Clifford R Jack; Ronald C Petersen; Gülin Öz; Kejal Kantarci Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2022-01-05 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Harro Seelaar; David J Irwin; Lucia A A Giannini; Daniel T Ohm; Annemieke J M Rozemuller; Laynie Dratch; EunRan Suh; Vivianna M van Deerlin; John Q Trojanowski; Edward B Lee; John C van Swieten; Murray Grossman Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2022-09-06 Impact factor: 15.887
Authors: David N Soleimani-Meigooni; Leonardo Iaccarino; Renaud La Joie; Suzanne Baker; Viktoriya Bourakova; Adam L Boxer; Lauren Edwards; Rana Eser; Maria-Luisa Gorno-Tempini; William J Jagust; Mustafa Janabi; Joel H Kramer; Orit H Lesman-Segev; Taylor Mellinger; Bruce L Miller; Julie Pham; Howard J Rosen; Salvatore Spina; William W Seeley; Amelia Strom; Lea T Grinberg; Gil D Rabinovici Journal: Brain Date: 2020-12-05 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Qin Chen; Bradley F Boeve; Nirubol Tosakulwong; Timothy Lesnick; Danielle Brushaber; Christina Dheel; Julie Fields; Leah Forsberg; Ralitza Gavrilova; Debra Gearhart; Dana Haley; Jeffrey L Gunter; Jonathan Graff-Radford; David Jones; David Knopman; Neill Graff-Radford; Ruth Kraft; Maria Lapid; Rosa Rademakers; Jeremy Syrjanen; Zbigniew K Wszolek; Howie Rosen; Adam L Boxer; Kejal Kantarci Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 11.800
Authors: David T Jones; Ryan A Townley; Jonathan Graff-Radford; Hugo Botha; David S Knopman; Ronald C Petersen; Clifford R Jack; Val J Lowe; Bradley F Boeve Journal: Neurol Genet Date: 2018-12-03
Authors: Rhian S Convery; Jieqing Jiao; Mica T M Clarke; Katrina M Moore; Carolin A M Koriath; Ione O C Woollacott; Philip S J Weston; Roger Gunn; Ilan Rabiner; David M Cash; Martin N Rossor; Jason D Warren; Nick C Fox; Sebastien Ourselin; Martina Bocchetta; Jonathan D Rohrer Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 10.154