Cargando…
The implications of different approaches to define AT(N) in Alzheimer disease
OBJECTIVE: To compare different β-amyloid (Aβ), tau, and neurodegeneration (AT[N]) variants within the Swedish BioFINDER studies. METHODS: A total of 490 participants were classified into AT(N) groups. These include 53 cognitively unimpaired (CU) and 48 cognitively impaired (CI) participants (14 mil...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7357296/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32398359 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000009485 |
_version_ | 1783558660640735232 |
---|---|
author | Mattsson-Carlgren, Niklas Leuzy, Antoine Janelidze, Shorena Palmqvist, Sebastian Stomrud, Erik Strandberg, Olof Smith, Ruben Hansson, Oskar |
author_facet | Mattsson-Carlgren, Niklas Leuzy, Antoine Janelidze, Shorena Palmqvist, Sebastian Stomrud, Erik Strandberg, Olof Smith, Ruben Hansson, Oskar |
author_sort | Mattsson-Carlgren, Niklas |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare different β-amyloid (Aβ), tau, and neurodegeneration (AT[N]) variants within the Swedish BioFINDER studies. METHODS: A total of 490 participants were classified into AT(N) groups. These include 53 cognitively unimpaired (CU) and 48 cognitively impaired (CI) participants (14 mild cognitive impairment [MCI] and 34 Alzheimer disease [AD] dementia) from BioFINDER-1 and 389 participants from BioFINDER-2 (245 CU and 144 CI [138 MCI and 6 AD dementia]). Biomarkers for A were CSF Aβ(42) and amyloid-PET ([(18)F]flutemetamol); for T, CSF phosphorylated tau (p-tau) and tau PET ([(18)F]flortaucipir); and for (N), hippocampal volume, temporal cortical thickness, and CSF neurofilament light (NfL). Binarization of biomarkers was achieved using cutoffs defined in other cohorts. The relationship between different AT(N) combinations and cognitive trajectories (longitudinal Mini-Mental State Examination scores) was examined using linear mixed modeling and coefficient of variation. RESULTS: Among CU participants, A−T−(N)− or A+T−(N)− variants were most common. However, more T+ cases were seen using p-tau than tau PET. Among CI participants, A+T+(N)+ was more common; however, more (N)+ cases were seen for MRI measures relative to CSF NfL. Tau PET best predicted longitudinal cognitive decline in CI and p-tau in CU participants. Among CI participants, continuous T (especially tau PET) and (N) measures improved the prediction of cognitive decline compared to binary measures. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that different AT(N) variants are not interchangeable, and that optimal variants differ by clinical stage. In some cases, dichotomizing biomarkers may result in loss of important prognostic information. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7357296 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73572962020-08-03 The implications of different approaches to define AT(N) in Alzheimer disease Mattsson-Carlgren, Niklas Leuzy, Antoine Janelidze, Shorena Palmqvist, Sebastian Stomrud, Erik Strandberg, Olof Smith, Ruben Hansson, Oskar Neurology Article OBJECTIVE: To compare different β-amyloid (Aβ), tau, and neurodegeneration (AT[N]) variants within the Swedish BioFINDER studies. METHODS: A total of 490 participants were classified into AT(N) groups. These include 53 cognitively unimpaired (CU) and 48 cognitively impaired (CI) participants (14 mild cognitive impairment [MCI] and 34 Alzheimer disease [AD] dementia) from BioFINDER-1 and 389 participants from BioFINDER-2 (245 CU and 144 CI [138 MCI and 6 AD dementia]). Biomarkers for A were CSF Aβ(42) and amyloid-PET ([(18)F]flutemetamol); for T, CSF phosphorylated tau (p-tau) and tau PET ([(18)F]flortaucipir); and for (N), hippocampal volume, temporal cortical thickness, and CSF neurofilament light (NfL). Binarization of biomarkers was achieved using cutoffs defined in other cohorts. The relationship between different AT(N) combinations and cognitive trajectories (longitudinal Mini-Mental State Examination scores) was examined using linear mixed modeling and coefficient of variation. RESULTS: Among CU participants, A−T−(N)− or A+T−(N)− variants were most common. However, more T+ cases were seen using p-tau than tau PET. Among CI participants, A+T+(N)+ was more common; however, more (N)+ cases were seen for MRI measures relative to CSF NfL. Tau PET best predicted longitudinal cognitive decline in CI and p-tau in CU participants. Among CI participants, continuous T (especially tau PET) and (N) measures improved the prediction of cognitive decline compared to binary measures. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that different AT(N) variants are not interchangeable, and that optimal variants differ by clinical stage. In some cases, dichotomizing biomarkers may result in loss of important prognostic information. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7357296/ /pubmed/32398359 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000009485 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Article Mattsson-Carlgren, Niklas Leuzy, Antoine Janelidze, Shorena Palmqvist, Sebastian Stomrud, Erik Strandberg, Olof Smith, Ruben Hansson, Oskar The implications of different approaches to define AT(N) in Alzheimer disease |
title | The implications of different approaches to define AT(N) in Alzheimer disease |
title_full | The implications of different approaches to define AT(N) in Alzheimer disease |
title_fullStr | The implications of different approaches to define AT(N) in Alzheimer disease |
title_full_unstemmed | The implications of different approaches to define AT(N) in Alzheimer disease |
title_short | The implications of different approaches to define AT(N) in Alzheimer disease |
title_sort | implications of different approaches to define at(n) in alzheimer disease |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7357296/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32398359 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000009485 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mattssoncarlgrenniklas theimplicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT leuzyantoine theimplicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT janelidzeshorena theimplicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT palmqvistsebastian theimplicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT stomruderik theimplicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT strandbergolof theimplicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT smithruben theimplicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT hanssonoskar theimplicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT mattssoncarlgrenniklas implicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT leuzyantoine implicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT janelidzeshorena implicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT palmqvistsebastian implicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT stomruderik implicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT strandbergolof implicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT smithruben implicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease AT hanssonoskar implicationsofdifferentapproachestodefineatninalzheimerdisease |