OBJECTIVE: There are minimal data directly comparing plasma neurofilament light (NfL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) in aging and neurodegenerative disease research. We evaluated associations of plasma NfL and plasma GFAP with brain volume and cognition in two independent cohorts of older adults diagnosed as clinically normal (CN), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or Alzheimer's dementia. METHODS: We studied 121 total participants (Cohort 1: n = 50, age 71.6 ± 6.9 years, 78% CN, 22% MCI; Cohort 2: n = 71, age 72.2 ± 9.2 years, 45% CN, 25% MCI, 30% dementia). Gray and white matter volumes were obtained for total brain and broad subregions of interest (ROIs). Neuropsychological testing evaluated memory, executive functioning, language, and visuospatial abilities. Plasma samples were analyzed in duplicate for NfL and GFAP using single molecule array assays (Quanterix Simoa). Linear regression models with structural MRI and cognitive outcomes included plasma NfL and GFAP simultaneously along with relevant covariates. RESULTS: Higher plasma GFAP was associated with lower white matter volume in both cohorts for temporal (Cohort 1: β = -0.33, p = .002; Cohort 2: β = -0.36, p = .03) and parietal ROIs (Cohort 1: β = -0.31, p = .01; Cohort 2: β = -0.35, p = .04). No consistent findings emerged for gray matter volumes. Higher plasma GFAP was associated with lower executive function scores (Cohort 1: β = -0.38, p = .01; Cohort 2: β = -0.36, p = .007). Plasma NfL was not associated with gray or white matter volumes, or cognition after adjusting for plasma GFAP. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma GFAP may be more sensitive to white matter and cognitive changes than plasma NfL. Biomarkers reflecting astroglial pathophysiology may capture complex dynamics of aging and neurodegenerative disease.
OBJECTIVE: There are minimal data directly comparing plasma neurofilament light (NfL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) in aging and neurodegenerative disease research. We evaluated associations of plasma NfL and plasma GFAP with brain volume and cognition in two independent cohorts of older adults diagnosed as clinically normal (CN), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or Alzheimer's dementia. METHODS: We studied 121 total participants (Cohort 1: n = 50, age 71.6 ± 6.9 years, 78% CN, 22% MCI; Cohort 2: n = 71, age 72.2 ± 9.2 years, 45% CN, 25% MCI, 30% dementia). Gray and white matter volumes were obtained for total brain and broad subregions of interest (ROIs). Neuropsychological testing evaluated memory, executive functioning, language, and visuospatial abilities. Plasma samples were analyzed in duplicate for NfL and GFAP using single molecule array assays (Quanterix Simoa). Linear regression models with structural MRI and cognitive outcomes included plasma NfL and GFAP simultaneously along with relevant covariates. RESULTS: Higher plasma GFAP was associated with lower white matter volume in both cohorts for temporal (Cohort 1: β = -0.33, p = .002; Cohort 2: β = -0.36, p = .03) and parietal ROIs (Cohort 1: β = -0.31, p = .01; Cohort 2: β = -0.35, p = .04). No consistent findings emerged for gray matter volumes. Higher plasma GFAP was associated with lower executive function scores (Cohort 1: β = -0.38, p = .01; Cohort 2: β = -0.36, p = .007). Plasma NfL was not associated with gray or white matter volumes, or cognition after adjusting for plasma GFAP. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma GFAP may be more sensitive to white matter and cognitive changes than plasma NfL. Biomarkers reflecting astroglial pathophysiology may capture complex dynamics of aging and neurodegenerative disease.
Entities:
Keywords:
Aging; Alzheimer’s; Astrocyte; Biomarkers; Dementia; Glial fibrillary acidic protein
Authors: Kaitlin B Casaletto; Miguel Arce Rentería; Judy Pa; Sarah E Tom; Amal Harrati; Nicole M Armstrong; K Bharat Rajan; Dan Mungas; Samantha Walters; Joel Kramer; Laura B Zahodne Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2020 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Katherine L Possin; Victor R Laluz; Oscar Z Alcantar; Bruce L Miller; Joel H Kramer Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 2010-10-26 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: Patrick Oeckl; Steffen Halbgebauer; Sarah Anderl-Straub; Petra Steinacker; André M Huss; Hermann Neugebauer; Christine A F von Arnim; Janine Diehl-Schmid; Timo Grimmer; Johannes Kornhuber; Piotr Lewczuk; Adrian Danek; Albert C Ludolph; Markus Otto Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Brianne M Bettcher; Kaitlin E Olson; Nichole E Carlson; Brice V McConnell; Tim Boyd; Vanesa Adame; D Adriana Solano; Paige Anton; Neil Markham; Ashesh A Thaker; Alexandria M Jensen; Erika N Dallmann; Huntington Potter; Christina Coughlan Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 5.133
Authors: Sandra Weintraub; Lilah Besser; Hiroko H Dodge; Merilee Teylan; Steven Ferris; Felicia C Goldstein; Bruno Giordani; Joel Kramer; David Loewenstein; Dan Marson; Dan Mungas; David Salmon; Kathleen Welsh-Bohmer; Xiao-Hua Zhou; Steven D Shirk; Alireza Atri; Walter A Kukull; Creighton Phelps; John C Morris Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2018 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Inge M W Verberk; Elisabeth Thijssen; Jannet Koelewijn; Kimberley Mauroo; Jeroen Vanbrabant; Arno de Wilde; Marissa D Zwan; Sander C J Verfaillie; Rik Ossenkoppele; Frederik Barkhof; Bart N M van Berckel; Philip Scheltens; Wiesje M van der Flier; Erik Stoops; Hugo M Vanderstichele; Charlotte E Teunissen Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Dror Shir; Jonathan Graff-Radford; Ekaterina I Hofrenning; Timothy G Lesnick; Scott A Przybelski; Val J Lowe; David S Knopman; Ronald C Petersen; Clifford R Jack; Prashanthi Vemuri; Alicia Algeciras-Schimnich; Michelle R Campbell; Nikki H Stricker; Michelle M Mielke Journal: Alzheimers Dement (Amst) Date: 2022-02-28