| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Bollack, Ariane, et al.
(författare)
-
Investigating reliable amyloid accumulation in Centiloids : Results from the AMYPAD Prognostic and Natural History Study
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Alzheimer's and Dementia. - 1552-5260 .- 1552-5279. ; 20:5, s. 3429-3441
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: To support clinical trial designs focused on early interventions, our study determined reliable early amyloid-β (Aβ) accumulation based on Centiloids (CL) in pre-dementia populations. METHODS: A total of 1032 participants from the Amyloid Imaging to Prevent Alzheimer's Disease–Prognostic and Natural History Study (AMYPAD-PNHS) and Insight46 who underwent [18F]flutemetamol, [18F]florbetaben or [18F]florbetapir amyloid-PET were included. A normative strategy was used to define reliable accumulation by estimating the 95th percentile of longitudinal measurements in sub-populations (NPNHS = 101/750, NInsight46 = 35/382) expected to remain stable over time. The baseline CL threshold that optimally predicts future accumulation was investigated using precision-recall analyses. Accumulation rates were examined using linear mixed-effect models. RESULTS: Reliable accumulation in the PNHS was estimated to occur at >3.0 CL/year. Baseline CL of 16 [12,19] best predicted future Aβ-accumulators. Rates of amyloid accumulation were tracer-independent, lower for APOE ε4 non-carriers, and for subjects with higher levels of education. DISCUSSION: Our results support a 12–20 CL window for inclusion into early secondary prevention studies. Reliable accumulation definition warrants further investigations.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
| 5. |
- Kramberger, Milica G., et al.
(författare)
-
Long-Term Cognitive Decline in Dementia with Lewy Bodies in a Large Multicenter, International Cohort
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Alzheimer's Disease. - 1387-2877 .- 1875-8908. ; 57:3, s. 787-795
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background/Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the rate and clinical predictors of cognitive decline in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and compare the findings with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) patients. Methods: Longitudinal scores for the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in 1,290 patients (835 DLB, 198 PDD, and 257 AD) were available from 18 centers with up to three years longitudinal data. Linear mixed effects analyses with appropriate covariates were used to model MMSE decline over time. Several subgroup analyses were performed, defined by anti-dementia medication use, baseline MMSE score, and DLB core features. Results: The mean annual decline in MMSE score was 2.1 points in DLB, compared to 1.6 in AD (p=0.07 compared to DLB) and 1.8 in PDD (p=0.19). Rates of decline were significantly higher in DLB compared to AD and PDD when baseline MMSE score was included as a covariate, and when only those DLB patients with an abnormal dopamine transporter SPECT scan were included. Decline was not predicted by sex, baseline MMSE score, or presence of specific DLB core features. Conclusions: The average annual decline in MMSE score in DLB is approximately two points. Although in the overall analyses there were no differences in the rate of decline between the three neurodegenerative disorders, there were indications of a more rapid decline in DLB than in AD and PDD. Further studies are needed to understand the predictors and mechanisms of cognitive decline in DLB.
|
|
| 6. |
- Wolk, David A., et al.
(författare)
-
Use of flutemetamol F18-labeled positron emission tomography and other biomarkers to assess risk of clinical progression in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment
- 2018
-
Ingår i: JAMA Neurology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2168-6149. ; 75:9, s. 1114-1123
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance: Patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) may progress to clinical Alzheimer disease (AD), remain stable, or revert to normal. Earlier progression to AD among patients who were β-amyloid positive vs those who were β-amyloid negative has been previously observed. Current research now accepts that a combination of biomarkers could provide greater refinement in the assessment of risk for clinical progression. Objective: To evaluate the ability of flutemetamol F 18 and other biomarkers to assess the risk of progression from aMCI to probable AD. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter cohort study, from November 11, 2009, to January 16, 2014, patients with aMCI underwent positron emission tomography (PET) at baseline followed by local clinical assessments every 6 months for up to 3 years. Patients with aMCI (365 screened; 232 were eligible) were recruited from 28 clinical centers in Europe and the United States. Physicians remained strictly blinded to the results of PET, and the standard of truth was an independent clinical adjudication committee that confirmed or refuted local assessments. Flutemetamol F 18-labeled PET scans were read centrally as either negative or positive by 5 blinded readers with no knowledge of clinical status. Statistical analysis was conducted from February 19, 2014, to January 26, 2018. Interventions: Flutemetamol F 18-labeled PET at baseline followed by up to 6 clinical visits every 6 months, as well as magnetic resonance imaging and multiple cognitive measures. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time from PET to probable AD or last follow-upwas plotted as a Kaplan-Meier survival curve; PET scan results, age, hippocampal volume, and aMCI stage were entered into Cox proportional hazards logistic regression analyses to identify variables associated with progression to probable AD. Results: Of 232 patients with aMCI (118 women and 114 men; mean [SD] age, 71.1 [8.6] years), 98 (42.2%) had positive results detected on PET scan. By 36 months, the rates of progression to probable AD were 36.2% overall (81 of 224 patients), 53.6%(52 of 97) for patients with positive results detected on PET scan, and 22.8% (29 of 127) for patients with negative results detected on PET scan. Hazard ratios for association with progression were 2.51 (95% CI, 1.57-3.99; P < .001) for a positive β-amyloid scan alone (primary outcome measure), 5.60 (95%CI, 3.14-9.98; P < .001) with additional low hippocampal volume, and 8.45 (95%CI, 4.40-16.24; P < .001) when poorer cognitive status was added to the model. Conclusions and Relevance: A combination of positive results of flutemetamol F 18-labeled PET, low hippocampal volume, and cognitive status corresponded with a high probability of risk of progression from aMCI to probable AD within 36 months.
|
|
