Cognitive changes of older adults with an equivocal amyloid load.
Aged
Aging
/ metabolism
Amyloid
/ metabolism
Aniline Compounds
Brain
/ diagnostic imaging
Cognition
/ physiology
Cognitive Dysfunction
/ diagnostic imaging
Ethylene Glycols
Executive Function
/ physiology
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Male
Memory
/ physiology
Neuropsychological Tests
Positron-Emission Tomography
Radiopharmaceuticals
Amyloid imaging
Equivocal cases
Executive functions
Memory
Journal
Journal of neurology
ISSN: 1432-1459
Titre abrégé: J Neurol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0423161
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
03
08
2018
accepted:
18
01
2019
revised:
05
12
2018
pubmed:
29
1
2019
medline:
30
6
2019
entrez:
29
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Observational and interventional studies addressing the link between amyloid (Aβ) burden and cognitive decline are increasing, but a clear definition of amyloid positivity is still lacking. This may represent a great stake for therapeutic studies enrolling Aβ + patients only. The main objective of this study was to define a population with "equivocal" amyloid status, and evaluate their cognitive changes. Sixty-five participants over 75 years old, from the Control group of the interventional MAPT study, at risk to develop Alzheimer's disease, were included. Participants were classified into three groups in terms of amyloid load: Aβ +, Aβ - and Equivocal participants (according to visual reading, global standardized uptake (SUVR) cut-offs, or a k-mean clustering method). The cognitive changes over time (memory, executive functions, attention and processing speed) of this Equivocal group were then compared to Aβ + and Aβ - participants. When classified by visual read, Equivocal participants' memory scores were comparable to the Aβ- participants, and greater than in Aβ + participants over time. Secondary analyses, using SUVR cut-offs classification, showed different trajectories with Equivocal participants being comparable to the Aβ + participants, and lower than Aβ-, on executive performance over time. This original work pointed out a population that may be of great interest for interventional studies, raising the question of how amyloid status should be defined and integrated in such studies. These findings should be replicated in future studies on larger datasets, to confirm what methodological approach would be the most suitable to highlight this specific neuroimaging entity.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Observational and interventional studies addressing the link between amyloid (Aβ) burden and cognitive decline are increasing, but a clear definition of amyloid positivity is still lacking. This may represent a great stake for therapeutic studies enrolling Aβ + patients only. The main objective of this study was to define a population with "equivocal" amyloid status, and evaluate their cognitive changes.
METHODS
METHODS
Sixty-five participants over 75 years old, from the Control group of the interventional MAPT study, at risk to develop Alzheimer's disease, were included. Participants were classified into three groups in terms of amyloid load: Aβ +, Aβ - and Equivocal participants (according to visual reading, global standardized uptake (SUVR) cut-offs, or a k-mean clustering method). The cognitive changes over time (memory, executive functions, attention and processing speed) of this Equivocal group were then compared to Aβ + and Aβ - participants.
RESULTS
RESULTS
When classified by visual read, Equivocal participants' memory scores were comparable to the Aβ- participants, and greater than in Aβ + participants over time. Secondary analyses, using SUVR cut-offs classification, showed different trajectories with Equivocal participants being comparable to the Aβ + participants, and lower than Aβ-, on executive performance over time.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This original work pointed out a population that may be of great interest for interventional studies, raising the question of how amyloid status should be defined and integrated in such studies. These findings should be replicated in future studies on larger datasets, to confirm what methodological approach would be the most suitable to highlight this specific neuroimaging entity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30689016
doi: 10.1007/s00415-019-09203-5
pii: 10.1007/s00415-019-09203-5
doi:
Substances chimiques
Amyloid
0
Aniline Compounds
0
Ethylene Glycols
0
Radiopharmaceuticals
0
florbetapir
6867Q6IKOD
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
835-843Subventions
Organisme : French Ministry of Health
ID : PHRC 2008
Références
J Nucl Med. 2007 Apr;48(4):547-52
pubmed: 17401090
Neurology. 2007 May 8;68(19):1603-6
pubmed: 17485647
JAMA. 2011 Jan 19;305(3):275-83
pubmed: 21245183
Alzheimers Dement. 2011 May;7(3):280-92
pubmed: 21514248
Lancet Neurol. 2011 Jul;10(7):667-70
pubmed: 21683932
Arch Neurol. 2011 Nov;68(11):1404-11
pubmed: 21747008
Neuroimage. 2012 Jan 16;59(2):1152-60
pubmed: 21884802
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012 Apr;39(4):621-31
pubmed: 22252372
Neurology. 2012 Feb 14;78(7):477-84
pubmed: 22302548
J Nucl Med. 2012 Mar;53(3):378-84
pubmed: 22331215
Ann Neurol. 2012 Oct;72(4):578-86
pubmed: 23109153
Neuroimage. 2013 May 1;71:207-15
pubmed: 23353602
Neurology. 2013 Apr 2;80(14):1341-8
pubmed: 23547267
Alzheimers Dement. 2015 Jan;11(1):1-15.e1-4
pubmed: 25443857
Medicine (Baltimore). 2014 Dec;93(27):e150
pubmed: 25501055
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015 Aug;42(9):1459-68
pubmed: 25952279
J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2014 Jun;1(1):13-22
pubmed: 26594639
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Aug;43(9):1686-99
pubmed: 26996778
Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2016 Oct 18;6:108-121
pubmed: 28239636
Lancet Neurol. 2017 May;16(5):377-389
pubmed: 28359749
JAMA Neurol. 2017 Jul 1;74(7):830-838
pubmed: 28558099
Neurology. 2017 Nov 14;89(20):2031-2038
pubmed: 29046362
Neurology. 2018 Jan 16;90(3):e206-e213
pubmed: 29263220
Neurology. 2018 Apr 24;90(17):759-760
pubmed: 29572279
Neurology. 2018 Apr 24;90(17):e1452-e1460
pubmed: 29572282