Daniele Altomare1, Arno de Wilde1, Rik Ossenkoppele1, Wiesje Pelkmans1, Femke Bouwman1, Colin Groot1, Ingrid van Maurik1, Marissa Zwan1, Maqsood Yaqub1, Frederik Barkhof1, Bart N van Berckel1, Charlotte E Teunissen1, Giovanni B Frisoni1, Philip Scheltens1, Wiesje M van der Flier2. 1. From the Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Department of Neurology (D.A., A.d.W., R.O., W.P., F.B., C.G., I.v.M., M.Z., B.N.v.B., P.S., W.M.v.d.F.), Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine (R.O., C.G., M.Y., F.B., B.N.v.B.), and Neurochemistry Laboratory, Department of Clinical Chemistry (C.E.T.), Amsterdam Neuroscience, and Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics (I.v.M., W.M.v.d.F.), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, the Netherlands; Laboratory of Neuroimaging of Aging (LANVIE) (D.A., G.B.F.), University of Geneva, Switzerland; Memory Clinic (D.A.), University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland; Laboratory of Alzheimer's Neuroimaging and Epidemiology (LANE) (D.A.), Saint John of God Clinical Research Centre; Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine (D.A.), University of Brescia, Italy; Clinical Memory Research Unit (R.O.), Lund University, Malmö, Sweden; Institutes of Neurology and Healthcare Engineering (F.B.), UCL, London, UK; and Memory Clinic (D.A., G.B.F.), University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland. 2. From the Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Department of Neurology (D.A., A.d.W., R.O., W.P., F.B., C.G., I.v.M., M.Z., B.N.v.B., P.S., W.M.v.d.F.), Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine (R.O., C.G., M.Y., F.B., B.N.v.B.), and Neurochemistry Laboratory, Department of Clinical Chemistry (C.E.T.), Amsterdam Neuroscience, and Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics (I.v.M., W.M.v.d.F.), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, the Netherlands; Laboratory of Neuroimaging of Aging (LANVIE) (D.A., G.B.F.), University of Geneva, Switzerland; Memory Clinic (D.A.), University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland; Laboratory of Alzheimer's Neuroimaging and Epidemiology (LANE) (D.A.), Saint John of God Clinical Research Centre; Department of Molecular and Translational Medicine (D.A.), University of Brescia, Italy; Clinical Memory Research Unit (R.O.), Lund University, Malmö, Sweden; Institutes of Neurology and Healthcare Engineering (F.B.), UCL, London, UK; and Memory Clinic (D.A., G.B.F.), University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland. wm.vdflier@amsterdamumc.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To apply the ATN scheme to memory clinic patients, to assess whether it discriminates patient populations with specific features. METHODS: We included 305 memory clinic patients (33% subjective cognitive decline [SCD]: 60 ± 9 years, 61% M; 19% mild cognitive impairment [MCI]: 68 ± 9 years, 68% M; 48% dementia: 66 ± 10 years, 58% M) classified for positivity (±) of amyloid (A) ([18F]Florbetaben PET), tau (T) (CSF p-tau), and neurodegeneration (N) (medial temporal lobe atrophy). We assessed ATN profiles' demographic, clinical, and cognitive features at baseline, and cognitive decline over time. RESULTS: The proportion of A+T+N+ patients increased with syndrome severity (from 1% in SCD to 14% in MCI and 35% in dementia), while the opposite was true for A-T-N- (from 48% to 19% and 6%). Compared to A-T-N-, patients with the Alzheimer disease profiles (A+T+N- and A+T+N+) were older (both p < 0.05) and had a higher prevalence of APOE ε4 (both p < 0.05) and lower Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) (both p < 0.05), memory (both p < 0.05), and visuospatial abilities (both p < 0.05) at baseline. Non-Alzheimer profiles A-T-N+ and A-T+N+ showed more severe white matter hyperintensities (both p < 0.05) and worse language performance (both p < 0.05) than A-T-N-. A linear mixed model showed faster decline on MMSE over time in A+T+N- and A+T+N+ (p = 0.059 and p < 0.001 vs A-T-N-), attributable mainly to patients without dementia. CONCLUSIONS: The ATN scheme identified different biomarker profiles with overlapping baseline features and patterns of cognitive decline. The large number of profiles, which may have different implications in patients with vs without dementia, poses a challenge to the application of the ATN scheme.
OBJECTIVE: To apply the ATN scheme to memory clinic patients, to assess whether it discriminates patient populations with specific features. METHODS: We included 305 memory clinic patients (33% subjective cognitive decline [SCD]: 60 ± 9 years, 61% M; 19% mild cognitive impairment [MCI]: 68 ± 9 years, 68% M; 48% dementia: 66 ± 10 years, 58% M) classified for positivity (±) of amyloid (A) ([18F]Florbetaben PET), tau (T) (CSF p-tau), and neurodegeneration (N) (medial temporal lobe atrophy). We assessed ATN profiles' demographic, clinical, and cognitive features at baseline, and cognitive decline over time. RESULTS: The proportion of A+T+N+ patients increased with syndrome severity (from 1% in SCD to 14% in MCI and 35% in dementia), while the opposite was true for A-T-N- (from 48% to 19% and 6%). Compared to A-T-N-, patients with the Alzheimer disease profiles (A+T+N- and A+T+N+) were older (both p < 0.05) and had a higher prevalence of APOE ε4 (both p < 0.05) and lower Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) (both p < 0.05), memory (both p < 0.05), and visuospatial abilities (both p < 0.05) at baseline. Non-Alzheimer profiles A-T-N+ and A-T+N+ showed more severe white matter hyperintensities (both p < 0.05) and worse language performance (both p < 0.05) than A-T-N-. A linear mixed model showed faster decline on MMSE over time in A+T+N- and A+T+N+ (p = 0.059 and p < 0.001 vs A-T-N-), attributable mainly to patients without dementia. CONCLUSIONS: The ATN scheme identified different biomarker profiles with overlapping baseline features and patterns of cognitive decline. The large number of profiles, which may have different implications in patients with vs without dementia, poses a challenge to the application of the ATN scheme.
Authors: Giovanni B Frisoni; Daniele Altomare; Dietmar Rudolf Thal; Federica Ribaldi; Rik van der Kant; Rik Ossenkoppele; Kaj Blennow; Jeffrey Cummings; Cornelia van Duijn; Peter M Nilsson; Pierre-Yves Dietrich; Philip Scheltens; Bruno Dubois Journal: Nat Rev Neurosci Date: 2021-11-23 Impact factor: 34.870
Authors: Elisabeth H Thijssen; Renaud La Joie; Amelia Strom; Corrina Fonseca; Leonardo Iaccarino; Amy Wolf; Salvatore Spina; Isabel E Allen; Yann Cobigo; Hilary Heuer; Lawren VandeVrede; Nicholas K Proctor; Argentina Lario Lago; Suzanne Baker; Rajeev Sivasankaran; Agnieszka Kieloch; Arvind Kinhikar; Lili Yu; Marie-Anne Valentin; Andreas Jeromin; Henrik Zetterberg; Oskar Hansson; Niklas Mattsson-Carlgren; Danielle Graham; Kaj Blennow; Joel H Kramer; Lea T Grinberg; William W Seeley; Howard Rosen; Bradley F Boeve; Bruce L Miller; Charlotte E Teunissen; Gil D Rabinovici; Julio C Rojas; Jeffrey L Dage; Adam L Boxer Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2021-09 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Alessandra Dodich; Aline Mendes; Frédéric Assal; Christian Chicherio; Barinjaka Rakotomiaramanana; Paulina Andryszak; Cristina Festari; Federica Ribaldi; Max Scheffler; Roger Schibli; Adam J Schwarz; Dina Zekry; Karl-Olof Lövblad; Marina Boccardi; Paul G Unschuld; Gabriel Gold; Giovanni B Frisoni; Valentina Garibotto Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-12-02 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Katheryn A Q Cousins; Jeffrey S Phillips; David J Irwin; Edward B Lee; David A Wolk; Leslie M Shaw; Henrik Zetterberg; Kaj Blennow; Sarah E Burke; Nikolas G Kinney; Garrett S Gibbons; Corey T McMillan; John Q Trojanowski; Murray Grossman Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Philip Scheltens; Bart De Strooper; Miia Kivipelto; Henne Holstege; Gael Chételat; Charlotte E Teunissen; Jeffrey Cummings; Wiesje M van der Flier Journal: Lancet Date: 2021-03-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Victor L Villemagne; Frederik Barkhof; Valentina Garibotto; Susan M Landau; Agneta Nordberg; Bart N M van Berckel Journal: Radiology Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 11.105