| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Boccardi, M., et al.
(författare)
-
The strategic biomarker roadmap for the validation of Alzheimer's diagnostic biomarkers: methodological update
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1619-7070 .- 1619-7089. ; 48, s. 2070-2085
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The 2017 Alzheimer's disease (AD) Strategic Biomarker Roadmap (SBR) structured the validation of AD diagnostic biomarkers into 5 phases, systematically assessing analytical validity (Phases 1-2), clinical validity (Phases 3-4), and clinical utility (Phase 5) through primary and secondary Aims. This framework allows to map knowledge gaps and research priorities, accelerating the route towards clinical implementation. Within an initiative aimed to assess the development of biomarkers of tau pathology, we revised this methodology consistently with progress in AD research. Methods We critically appraised the adequacy of the 2017 Biomarker Roadmap within current diagnostic frameworks, discussed updates at a workshop convening the Alzheimer's Association and 8 leading AD biomarker research groups, and detailed the methods to allow consistent assessment of aims achievement for tau and other AD diagnostic biomarkers. Results The 2020 update applies to all AD diagnostic biomarkers. In Phases 2-3, we admitted a greater variety of study designs (e.g., cross-sectional in addition to longitudinal) and reference standards (e.g., biomarker confirmation in addition to clinical progression) based on construct (in addition to criterion) validity. We structured a systematic data extraction to enable transparent and formal evidence assessment procedures. Finally, we have clarified issues that need to be addressed to generate data eligible to evidence-to-decision procedures. Discussion This revision allows for more versatile and precise assessment of existing evidence, keeps up with theoretical developments, and helps clinical researchers in producing evidence suitable for evidence-to-decision procedures. Compliance with this methodology is essential to implement AD biomarkers efficiently in clinical research and diagnostics.
|
|
| 5. |
- Chetelat, G., et al.
(författare)
-
Amyloid-PET and 18-F-FDG-PET in the diagnostic investigation of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Lancet Neurology. - 1474-4422 .- 1474-4465. ; 19:11, s. 951-962
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Various biomarkers are available to support the diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases in clinical and research settings. Among the molecular imaging biomarkers, amyloid-PET, which assesses brain amyloid deposition, and F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (F-18-FDG) PET, which assesses glucose metabolism, provide valuable and complementary information. However, uncertainty remains regarding the optimal timepoint, combination, and an order in which these PET biomarkers should be used in diagnostic evaluations because conclusive evidence is missing. Following an expert panel discussion, we reached an agreement on the specific use of the individual biomarkers, based on available evidence and clinical expertise. We propose a diagnostic algorithm with optimal timepoints for these PET biomarkers, also taking into account evidence from other biomarkers, for early and differential diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases that can lead to dementia. We propose three main diagnostic pathways with distinct biomarker sequences, in which amyloid-PET and F-18-FDG-PET are placed at different positions in the order of diagnostic evaluations, depending on clinical presentation. We hope that this algorithm can support diagnostic decision making in specialist clinical settings with access to these biomarkers and might stimulate further research towards optimal diagnostic strategies.
|
|
| 6. |
- Frisoni, G. B., et al.
(författare)
-
Strategic roadmap for an early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease based on biomarkers
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Lancet Neurology. - 1474-4422 .- 1474-4465. ; 16:8, s. 661-676
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease can be improved by the use of biological measures. Biomarkers of functional impairment, neuronal loss, and protein deposition that can be assessed by neuroimaging (ie, MRI and PET) or CSF analysis are increasingly being used to diagnose Alzheimer's disease in research studies and specialist clinical settings. However, the validation of the clinical usefulness of these biomarkers is incomplete, and that is hampering reimbursement for these tests by health insurance providers, their widespread clinical implementation, and improvements in quality of health care. We have developed a strategic five-phase roadmap to foster the clinical validation of biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease, adapted from the approach for cancer biomarkers. Sufficient evidence of analytical validity (phase 1 of a structured framework adapted from oncology) is available for all biomarkers, but their clinical validity (phases 2 and 3) and clinical utility (phases 4 and 5) are incomplete. To complete these phases, research priorities include the standardisation of the readout of these assays and thresholds for normality, the evaluation of their performance in detecting early disease, the development of diagnostic algorithms comprising combinations of biomarkers, and the development of clinical guidelines for the use of biomarkers in qualified memory clinics.
|
|
| 7. |
- Altomare, D., et al.
(författare)
-
Plasma biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: a field-test in a memory clinic
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. - 0022-3050. ; 94:6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The key Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers are traditionally measured with techniques/exams that are either expensive (amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) and tau-PET), invasive (cerebrospinal fluid A beta 42 and p-tau 181), or poorly specific (atrophy on MRI and hypometabolism on fluorodeoxyglucose-PET). Recently developed plasma biomarkers could significantly enhance the efficiency of the diagnostic pathway in memory clinics and improve patient care. This study aimed to: (1) confirm the correlations between plasma and traditional AD biomarkers, (2) assess the diagnostic accuracy of plasma biomarkers as compared with traditional biomarkers, and (3) estimate the proportion of traditional exams potentially saved thanks to the use of plasma biomarkers. Methods Participants were 200 patients with plasma biomarkers and at least one traditional biomarker collected within 12 months. Results Overall, plasma biomarkers significantly correlated with biomarkers assessed through traditional techniques: up to r=0.50 (p<0.001) among amyloid, r=0.43 (p=0.002) among tau, and r=-0.23 (p=0.001) among neurodegeneration biomarkers. Moreover, plasma biomarkers showed high accuracy in discriminating the biomarker status (normal or abnormal) determined by using traditional biomarkers: up to area under the curve (AUC)=0.87 for amyloid, AUC=0.82 for tau, and AUC=0.63 for neurodegeneration status. The use of plasma as a gateway to traditional biomarkers using cohort-specific thresholds (with 95% sensitivity and 95% specificity) could save up to 49% of amyloid, 38% of tau, and 16% of neurodegeneration biomarkers. Conclusion The implementation of plasma biomarkers could save a remarkable proportion of more expensive traditional exams, making the diagnostic workup more cost-effective and improving patient care.
|
|
| 8. |
- Ashton, Nicholas J., et al.
(författare)
-
The validation status of blood biomarkers of amyloid and phospho-tau assessed with the 5-phase development framework for AD biomarkers
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1619-7070 .- 1619-7089. ; 48, s. 2140-2156
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose The development of blood biomarkers that reflect Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology (phosphorylated tau and amyloid-beta) has offered potential as scalable tests for dementia differential diagnosis and early detection. In 2019, the Geneva AD Biomarker Roadmap Initiative included blood biomarkers in the systematic validation of AD biomarkers. Methods A panel of experts convened in November 2019 at a two-day workshop in Geneva. The level of maturity (fully achieved, partly achieved, preliminary evidence, not achieved, unsuccessful) of blood biomarkers was assessed based on the Biomarker Roadmap methodology and discussed fully during the workshop which also evaluated cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and positron emission tomography (PET) biomarkers. Results Plasma p-tau has shown analytical validity (phase 2 primary aim 1) and first evidence of clinical validity (phase 3 primary aim 1), whereas the maturity level for A beta remains to be partially achieved. Full and partial achievement has been assigned to p-tau and A beta, respectively, in their associations to ante-mortem measures (phase 2 secondary aim 2). However, only preliminary evidence exists for the influence of covariates, assay comparison and cut-off criteria. Conclusions Despite the relative infancy of blood biomarkers, in comparison to CSF biomarkers, much has already been achieved for phases 1 through 3 - with p-tau having greater success in detecting AD and predicting disease progression. However, sufficient data about the effect of covariates on the biomarker measurement is lacking. No phase 4 (real-world performance) or phase 5 (assessment of impact/cost) aim has been tested, thus not achieved.
|
|
| 9. |
- Caprioglio, C, et al.
(författare)
-
Analysis of Psychological Symptoms Following Disclosure of Amyloid-Positron Emission Tomography Imaging Results to Adults With Subjective Cognitive Decline
- 2023
-
Ingår i: JAMA network open. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2574-3805. ; 6:1, s. e2250921-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Individuals who are amyloid-positive with subjective cognitive decline and clinical features increasing the likelihood of preclinical Alzheimer disease (SCD+) are at higher risk of developing dementia. Some individuals with SCD+ undergo amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) as part of research studies and frequently wish to know their amyloid status; however, the disclosure of a positive amyloid-PET result might have psychological risks.ObjectiveTo assess the psychological outcomes of the amyloid-PET result disclosure in individuals with SCD+ and explore which variables are associated with a safer disclosure in individuals who are amyloid positive.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis prospective, multicenter study was conducted as part of The Amyloid Imaging to Prevent Alzheimer Disease Diagnostic and Patient Management Study (AMYPAD-DPMS) (recruitment period: from April 2018 to October 2020). The setting was 5 European memory clinics, and participants included patients with SCD+ who underwent amyloid-PET. Statistical analysis was performed from July to October 2022.ExposuresDisclosure of amyloid-PET result.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPsychological outcomes were defined as (1) disclosure related distress, assessed using the Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R; scores of at least 33 indicate probable presence of posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD]); and (2) anxiety and depression, assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS; scores of at least 15 indicate probable presence of severe mood disorder symptoms).ResultsAfter disclosure, 27 patients with amyloid-positive SCD+ (median [IQR] age, 70 [66-74] years; gender: 14 men [52%]; median [IQR] education: 15 [13 to 17] years, median [IQR] Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score, 29 [28 to 30]) had higher median (IQR) IES-R total score (10 [2 to 14] vs 0 [0 to 2]; P &lt; .001), IES-R avoidance (0.00 [0.00 to 0.69] vs 0.00 [0.00 to 0.00]; P &lt; .001), IES-R intrusions (0.50 [0.13 to 0.75] vs 0.00 [0.00 to 0.25]; P &lt; .001), and IES-R hyperarousal (0.33 [0.00 to 0.67] vs 0.00 [0.00 to 0.00]; P &lt; .001) scores than the 78 patients who were amyloid-negative (median [IQR], age, 67 [64 to 74] years, 45 men [58%], median [IQR] education: 15 [12 to 17] years, median [IQR] MMSE score: 29 [28 to 30]). There were no observed differences between amyloid-positive and amyloid-negative patients in the median (IQR) HADS Anxiety (–1.0 [–3.0 to 1.8] vs –2.0 [–4.8 to 1.0]; P = .06) and Depression (–1.0 [–2.0 to 0.0] vs –1.0 [–3.0 to 0.0]; P = .46) deltas (score after disclosure – scores at baseline). In patients with amyloid-positive SCD+, despite the small sample size, higher education was associated with lower disclosure-related distress (ρ = –0.43; P = .02) whereas the presence of study partner was associated with higher disclosure-related distress (W = 7.5; P = .03). No participants with amyloid-positive SCD+ showed probable presence of PTSD or severe anxiety or depression symptoms at follow-up.Conclusions and RelevanceThe disclosure of a positive amyloid-PET result to patients with SCD+ was associated with a bigger psychological change, yet such change did not reach the threshold for clinical concern.
|
|
| 10. |
- Caprioglio, C, et al.
(författare)
-
Analysis of Psychological Symptoms Following Disclosure of Amyloid-Positron Emission Tomography Imaging Results to Adults With Subjective Cognitive Decline
- 2023
-
Ingår i: JAMA network open. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2574-3805. ; 6:1, s. e2250921-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Individuals who are amyloid-positive with subjective cognitive decline and clinical features increasing the likelihood of preclinical Alzheimer disease (SCD+) are at higher risk of developing dementia. Some individuals with SCD+ undergo amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) as part of research studies and frequently wish to know their amyloid status; however, the disclosure of a positive amyloid-PET result might have psychological risks.ObjectiveTo assess the psychological outcomes of the amyloid-PET result disclosure in individuals with SCD+ and explore which variables are associated with a safer disclosure in individuals who are amyloid positive.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis prospective, multicenter study was conducted as part of The Amyloid Imaging to Prevent Alzheimer Disease Diagnostic and Patient Management Study (AMYPAD-DPMS) (recruitment period: from April 2018 to October 2020). The setting was 5 European memory clinics, and participants included patients with SCD+ who underwent amyloid-PET. Statistical analysis was performed from July to October 2022.ExposuresDisclosure of amyloid-PET result.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPsychological outcomes were defined as (1) disclosure related distress, assessed using the Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R; scores of at least 33 indicate probable presence of posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD]); and (2) anxiety and depression, assessed using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale (HADS; scores of at least 15 indicate probable presence of severe mood disorder symptoms).ResultsAfter disclosure, 27 patients with amyloid-positive SCD+ (median [IQR] age, 70 [66-74] years; gender: 14 men [52%]; median [IQR] education: 15 [13 to 17] years, median [IQR] Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score, 29 [28 to 30]) had higher median (IQR) IES-R total score (10 [2 to 14] vs 0 [0 to 2]; P &lt; .001), IES-R avoidance (0.00 [0.00 to 0.69] vs 0.00 [0.00 to 0.00]; P &lt; .001), IES-R intrusions (0.50 [0.13 to 0.75] vs 0.00 [0.00 to 0.25]; P &lt; .001), and IES-R hyperarousal (0.33 [0.00 to 0.67] vs 0.00 [0.00 to 0.00]; P &lt; .001) scores than the 78 patients who were amyloid-negative (median [IQR], age, 67 [64 to 74] years, 45 men [58%], median [IQR] education: 15 [12 to 17] years, median [IQR] MMSE score: 29 [28 to 30]). There were no observed differences between amyloid-positive and amyloid-negative patients in the median (IQR) HADS Anxiety (–1.0 [–3.0 to 1.8] vs –2.0 [–4.8 to 1.0]; P = .06) and Depression (–1.0 [–2.0 to 0.0] vs –1.0 [–3.0 to 0.0]; P = .46) deltas (score after disclosure – scores at baseline). In patients with amyloid-positive SCD+, despite the small sample size, higher education was associated with lower disclosure-related distress (ρ = –0.43; P = .02) whereas the presence of study partner was associated with higher disclosure-related distress (W = 7.5; P = .03). No participants with amyloid-positive SCD+ showed probable presence of PTSD or severe anxiety or depression symptoms at follow-up.Conclusions and RelevanceThe disclosure of a positive amyloid-PET result to patients with SCD+ was associated with a bigger psychological change, yet such change did not reach the threshold for clinical concern.
|
|
