Matthew R Woodward1, Muhammad Ubaid Hafeez1, Qianya Qi2, Ahmed Riaz1, Ralph H B Benedict1, Li Yan2, Kinga Szigeti3. 1. Alzheimer's Disease and Memory Disorders Center, Department of Neurology, University at Buffalo, SUNY, Buffalo, NY. 2. Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, University at Buffalo, SUNY, Buffalo, NY. 3. Alzheimer's Disease and Memory Disorders Center, Department of Neurology, University at Buffalo, SUNY, Buffalo, NY. Electronic address: szigeti@buffalo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore whether the ability to recognize specific odorant items is differentially affected in aging versus Alzheimer disease (AD); to refine olfactory identification deficit (OID) as a biomarker of prodromal and early AD. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter cross-sectional study with a longitudinal arm. SETTING: Outpatient memory diagnostic clinics in New York and Texas. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 65 and older with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and AD and healthy aging (HA) subjects in the comparison group. MEASUREMENTS: Participants completed the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and neuropsychological testing. AD-associated odorants (AD-10) were selected based on a model of ordinal logistic regression. Age-associated odorants (Age-10) were identified using a linear model. RESULTS: For the 841 participants (234 HA, 192 aMCI, 415 AD), AD-10 was superior to Age-10 in separating HA and AD. AD-10 was associated with a more widespread cognitive deficit across multiple domains, in contrast to Age-10. The disease- and age-associated odorants clustered separately in age and AD. AD-10 predicted conversion from aMCI to AD. CONCLUSIONS: Nonoverlapping UPSIT items were identified that were individually associated with age and disease. Despite a modest predictive value of the AD-specific items for conversion to AD, the AD-specific items may be useful in enriching samples to better identify those at risk for AD. Further studies are needed with monomolecular and unilateral stimulation and orthogonal biomarker validation to further refine disease- and age-associated signals.
OBJECTIVES: To explore whether the ability to recognize specific odorant items is differentially affected in aging versus Alzheimer disease (AD); to refine olfactory identification deficit (OID) as a biomarker of prodromal and early AD. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter cross-sectional study with a longitudinal arm. SETTING:Outpatient memory diagnostic clinics in New York and Texas. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 65 and older with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and AD and healthy aging (HA) subjects in the comparison group. MEASUREMENTS: Participants completed the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) and neuropsychological testing. AD-associated odorants (AD-10) were selected based on a model of ordinal logistic regression. Age-associated odorants (Age-10) were identified using a linear model. RESULTS: For the 841 participants (234 HA, 192 aMCI, 415 AD), AD-10 was superior to Age-10 in separating HA and AD. AD-10 was associated with a more widespread cognitive deficit across multiple domains, in contrast to Age-10. The disease- and age-associated odorants clustered separately in age and AD. AD-10 predicted conversion from aMCI to AD. CONCLUSIONS: Nonoverlapping UPSIT items were identified that were individually associated with age and disease. Despite a modest predictive value of the AD-specific items for conversion to AD, the AD-specific items may be useful in enriching samples to better identify those at risk for AD. Further studies are needed with monomolecular and unilateral stimulation and orthogonal biomarker validation to further refine disease- and age-associated signals.
Authors: Matthias H Tabert; Xinhua Liu; Richard L Doty; Michael Serby; Diana Zamora; Gregory H Pelton; Karen Marder; Mark W Albers; Yaakov Stern; D P Devanand Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Matthew R Woodward; Chaitanya V Amrutkar; Harshit C Shah; Ralph H B Benedict; Sanjanaa Rajakrishnan; Rachelle S Doody; Li Yan; Kinga Szigeti Journal: Neurol Clin Pract Date: 2017-02
Authors: D P Devanand; K S Michaels-Marston; X Liu; G H Pelton; M Padilla; K Marder; K Bell; Y Stern; R Mayeux Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Cécilia Tremblay; Geidy E Serrano; Anthony J Intorcia; Monica R Mariner; Lucia I Sue; Richard A Arce; Alireza Atri; Charles H Adler; Christine M Belden; Holly A Shill; Erika Driver-Dunckley; Shyamal H Mehta; Thomas G Beach Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2022-07-19 Impact factor: 3.148
Authors: Erin E Sundermann; Adam Fields; Rowan Saloner; Ben Gouaux; Ajay Bharti; Claire Murphy; David J Moore Journal: AIDS Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 4.632
Authors: Xiuli Dan; Noah Wechter; Samuel Gray; Joy G Mohanty; Deborah L Croteau; Vilhelm A Bohr Journal: Ageing Res Rev Date: 2021-07-27 Impact factor: 11.788
Authors: Kinga Szigeti; Ivanna Ihnatovych; Barbara Birkaya; Ziqiang Chen; Aya Ouf; Dinesh C Indurthi; Jonathan E Bard; Julien Kann; Alexandrea Adams; Lee Chaves; Norbert Sule; Joan S Reisch; Valory Pavlik; Ralph H B Benedict; Anthony Auerbach; Gregory Wilding Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2020-08-17 Impact factor: 8.143
Authors: Gowoon Son; Ali Jahanshahi; Seung-Jun Yoo; Jackson T Boonstra; David A Hopkins; Harry W M Steinbusch; Cheil Moon Journal: BMB Rep Date: 2021-06 Impact factor: 4.778