| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Coley, Nicola, et al.
(författare)
-
Plasma p-tau181 as an outcome and predictor of multidomain intervention effects: a secondary analysis of a randomised, controlled, dementia prevention trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Healthy Longevity. - 2666-7568. ; 5:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: It is unknown whether multidomain interventions, which might preserve late-life cognition, affect Alzheimer's disease pathology. Previous studies measured cerebrospinal fluid and imaging Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in small subsamples of multidomain trial participants. Newly developed assays enable the measurement of blood-based Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in larger samples. We aimed to assess whether plasma tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (p-tau181) was able to detect or predict 3-year multidomain intervention effects. Methods: This is a secondary analysis of the randomised, controlled, Multidomain Alzheimer Prevention Trial (MAPT) testing a 3-year multidomain intervention, omega-3 fatty acid supplementation, or both versus placebo, in individuals aged 70 years and older in 13 memory centres in France and Monaco. Plasma p-tau181 was measured in stored blood samples in a subsample of 527 participants on an intention-to-treat basis. Changes in cognitive score were calculated as a composite measure using the average of Z scores for the following tests: Mini Mental State Examination orientation items, Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (sum of free and total recall scores), category fluency, and Digit Symbol Substitution Test. Intervention effects on 3-year change in p-tau181 concentration were estimated by use of a linear mixed model with centre-specific random intercepts. Findings: Recruitment took place between May 30, 2008, and Feb 24, 2011. Median baseline plasma p-tau181 was 8·8 pg/mL (IQR 6·7–11·9) in the total sample, and significantly higher in older individuals, men, APOE ε4 carriers, and participants with renal dysfunction or a positive PET amyloid scan. During 3-year follow-up, individuals with raised baseline p-tau181 underwent greater cognitive decline (eg, mean difference in 3-year change on the composite cognitive score between control group participants with normal and abnormal baseline levels of p-tau was −0·34 [effect size −0·52; 95% CI −0·61 to 0·07] in the fully adjusted model using a 12·4 pg/mL cutoff for abnormal baseline p-tau181), but there were no intervention effects on change in p-tau181 either in this subgroup or the total population, and no effect on cognitive change in individuals with raised baseline p-tau181 (eg, in the fully adjusted model using the 12·4 pg/mL cutoff for p-tau181 abnormality, the mean difference [95% CI] in this subgroup in 3-year decline on the composite cognitive score between the control group and the multidomain + omega-3 group, the omega-3 group, and the multidomain intervention group, was, respectively: 0·13 [−0·21 to 0·47], 0·03 [−0·30 to 0·36], and 0·10 [−0·26 to 0·46]). Surprisingly, individuals with raised baseline p-tau181 showed a decrease in p-tau181 during follow-up (eg, unadjusted mean [95% CI] 3-year change was −3·01 pg/mL (−4·45 to −1·56) in control group subjects with abnormal baseline p-tau181 [using the 12·4 pg/mL abnormal p-tau cutoff]). Interpretation: Our results support the utility of p-tau181 as a prognostic biomarker, but it did not predict or detect intervention effects in this study. Further investigation of its usefulness as a prevention trial outcome measure is required.
|
|
| 3. |
- 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.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Sousa, João M., et al.
(författare)
-
Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging
- 2020
-
Ingår i: EJNMMI Physics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2197-7364. ; 7:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain.METHODS: Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery (R1) images and binding potential (BPND) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I BPND and R1 estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. BPND was examined for striatal regions and R1 in clusters of regions across the brain.RESULTS: For BPND, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (- 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). R1 estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (- 1.0-3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both R1 and BPND. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to - 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to - 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC.CONCLUSIONS: Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling.
|
|
