Vos Stephanie J B, Gordon Brian A, Su Yi, Visser Pieter Jelle, Holtzman David M, Morris John C, Fagan Anne M, Benzinger Tammie L S
Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Center Limburg, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Department of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA; Knight Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
Neurobiol Aging. 2016 Aug;44:1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2016.03.025. Epub 2016 Apr 4.
The National Institute of Aging and Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA) criteria for Alzheimer disease (AD) treat neuroimaging and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) markers of AD pathology as if they would be interchangeable. We tested this assumption in 212 cognitively normal participants who have both neuroimaging and CSF measures of β-amyloid (CSF Aβ1-42 and positron emission tomography imaging with Pittsburgh Compound B) and neuronal injury (CSF t-tau and p-tau and structural magnetic resonance imaging) with longitudinal clinical follow-up. Participants were classified in preclinical AD stage 1 (β-amyloidosis) or preclinical AD stage 2+ (β-amyloidosis and neuronal injury) using the NIA-AA criteria, or in the normal or suspected non-Alzheimer disease pathophysiology group (neuronal injury without β-amyloidosis). At baseline, 21% of participants had preclinical AD based on CSF and 28% based on neuroimaging. Between modalities, staging was concordant in only 47% of participants. Disagreement resulted from low concordance between biomarkers of neuronal injury. Still, individuals in stage 2+ using either criterion had an increased risk for clinical decline. This highlights the heterogeneity of the definition of neuronal injury and has important implications for clinical trials using biomarkers for enrollment or as surrogate end point measures.
美国国立衰老研究所和阿尔茨海默病协会(NIA-AA)的阿尔茨海默病(AD)标准将AD病理学的神经影像学和脑脊液(CSF)标志物视为可互换的。我们对212名认知正常的参与者进行了测试,这些参与者同时接受了β-淀粉样蛋白的神经影像学和脑脊液测量(脑脊液Aβ1-42以及匹兹堡化合物B正电子发射断层扫描成像)和神经元损伤测量(脑脊液总tau蛋白和磷酸化tau蛋白以及结构磁共振成像),并进行了纵向临床随访。根据NIA-AA标准,参与者被分类为临床前AD 1期(β-淀粉样变性)或临床前AD 2+期(β-淀粉样变性和神经元损伤),或正常或疑似非阿尔茨海默病病理生理学组(无β-淀粉样变性的神经元损伤)。在基线时,21%的参与者基于脑脊液处于临床前AD阶段,28%基于神经影像学处于该阶段。在不同检测方式之间,分期仅在47%的参与者中一致。不一致是由于神经元损伤生物标志物之间的一致性较低。尽管如此,使用任何一种标准处于2+期的个体临床衰退风险增加。这突出了神经元损伤定义的异质性,并对使用生物标志物进行入组或作为替代终点指标的临床试验具有重要意义。