OBJECTIVE: To evaluate temporal correlations between CSF and neuroimaging (PET and MRI) measures of amyloid, tau, and neurodegeneration in relation to Alzheimer disease (AD) progression. METHODS: A total of 371 cognitively unimpaired and impaired participants enrolled in longitudinal studies of AD had both CSF (β-amyloid [Aβ]42, phosphorylated tau181, total tau, and neurofilament light chain) and neuroimaging (Pittsburgh compound B [PiB] PET, flortaucipir PET, and structural MRI) measures. The pairwise time interval between CSF and neuroimaging measures was binned into 2-year periods. Spearman correlations identified the time bin when CSF and neuroimaging measures most strongly correlated. CSF and neuroimaging measures were then binarized as biomarker-positive or biomarker-negative using Gaussian mixture modeling. Cohen kappa coefficient identified the time bin when CSF measures best agreed with corresponding neuroimaging measures when determining amyloid, tau, and neurodegeneration biomarker positivity. RESULTS: CSF Aβ42 and PiB PET showed maximal correlation when collected within 6 years of each other (R ≈ -0.5). CSF phosphorylated tau181 and flortaucipir PET showed maximal correlation when CSF was collected 4 to 8 years prior to PET (R ≈ 0.4). CSF neurofilament light chain and cortical thickness showed low correlation, regardless of time interval (R avg ≈ -0.3). Similarly, CSF total tau and cortical thickness had low correlation, regardless of time interval (R avg < -0.2). CONCLUSIONS: CSF Aβ42 and PiB PET best agree when acquired in close temporal proximity, whereas CSF phosphorylated tau precedes flortaucipir PET by 4 to 8 years. CSF and neuroimaging measures of neurodegeneration have low correspondence and are not interchangeable at any time interval.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate temporal correlations between CSF and neuroimaging (PET and MRI) measures of amyloid, tau, and neurodegeneration in relation to Alzheimer disease (AD) progression. METHODS: A total of 371 cognitively unimpaired and impaired participants enrolled in longitudinal studies of AD had both CSF (β-amyloid [Aβ]42, phosphorylated tau181, total tau, and neurofilament light chain) and neuroimaging (Pittsburgh compound B [PiB] PET, flortaucipir PET, and structural MRI) measures. The pairwise time interval between CSF and neuroimaging measures was binned into 2-year periods. Spearman correlations identified the time bin when CSF and neuroimaging measures most strongly correlated. CSF and neuroimaging measures were then binarized as biomarker-positive or biomarker-negative using Gaussian mixture modeling. Cohen kappa coefficient identified the time bin when CSF measures best agreed with corresponding neuroimaging measures when determining amyloid, tau, and neurodegeneration biomarker positivity. RESULTS: CSF Aβ42 and PiB PET showed maximal correlation when collected within 6 years of each other (R ≈ -0.5). CSF phosphorylated tau181 and flortaucipir PET showed maximal correlation when CSF was collected 4 to 8 years prior to PET (R ≈ 0.4). CSF neurofilament light chain and cortical thickness showed low correlation, regardless of time interval (R avg ≈ -0.3). Similarly, CSF total tau and cortical thickness had low correlation, regardless of time interval (R avg < -0.2). CONCLUSIONS: CSF Aβ42 and PiB PET best agree when acquired in close temporal proximity, whereas CSF phosphorylated tau precedes flortaucipir PET by 4 to 8 years. CSF and neuroimaging measures of neurodegeneration have low correspondence and are not interchangeable at any time interval.
Authors: Bruce Fischl; André van der Kouwe; Christophe Destrieux; Eric Halgren; Florent Ségonne; David H Salat; Evelina Busa; Larry J Seidman; Jill Goldstein; David Kennedy; Verne Caviness; Nikos Makris; Bruce Rosen; Anders M Dale Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: John C Morris; Suzanne E Schindler; Lena M McCue; Krista L Moulder; Tammie L S Benzinger; Carlos Cruchaga; Anne M Fagan; Elizabeth Grant; Brian A Gordon; David M Holtzman; Chengjie Xiong Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Yi Su; Tyler M Blazey; Abraham Z Snyder; Marcus E Raichle; Daniel S Marcus; Beau M Ances; Randall J Bateman; Nigel J Cairns; Patricia Aldea; Lisa Cash; Jon J Christensen; Karl Friedrichsen; Russ C Hornbeck; Angela M Farrar; Christopher J Owen; Richard Mayeux; Adam M Brickman; William Klunk; Julie C Price; Paul M Thompson; Bernadino Ghetti; Andrew J Saykin; Reisa A Sperling; Keith A Johnson; Peter R Schofield; Virginia Buckles; John C Morris; Tammie L S Benzinger Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Milos D Ikonomovic; William E Klunk; Eric E Abrahamson; Chester A Mathis; Julie C Price; Nicholas D Tsopelas; Brian J Lopresti; Scott Ziolko; Wenzhu Bi; William R Paljug; Manik L Debnath; Caroline E Hope; Barbara A Isanski; Ronald L Hamilton; Steven T DeKosky Journal: Brain Date: 2008-03-12 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Bradford C Dickerson; Akram Bakkour; David H Salat; Eric Feczko; Jenni Pacheco; Douglas N Greve; Fran Grodstein; Christopher I Wright; Deborah Blacker; H Diana Rosas; Reisa A Sperling; Alireza Atri; John H Growdon; Bradley T Hyman; John C Morris; Bruce Fischl; Randy L Buckner Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2008-07-16 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: Charles D Chen; Timothy R Holden; Brian A Gordon; Erin E Franklin; Yan Li; Dean W Coble; Hongbo Luo; Randall J Bateman; Beau M Ances; Richard J Perrin; Tammie L S Benzinger; Nigel J Cairns; John C Morris Journal: Ann Clin Transl Neurol Date: 2020-11-05 Impact factor: 5.430
Authors: Christina B Young; Susan M Landau; Theresa M Harrison; Kathleen L Poston; Elizabeth C Mormino Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2021-09-03 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Shorena Janelidze; Oskar Hansson; Alexa Pichet Binette; Sebastian Palmqvist; Divya Bali; Gill Farrar; Christopher J Buckley; David A Wolk; Henrik Zetterberg; Kaj Blennow Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2022-03-29 Impact factor: 8.823