From the Alzheimer Center, Departments of Neurology (J.L.E., W.P., I.M.W.V., K.A.v.d.B., M.v.L., P.S., N.D.P., B.N.M.v.B., W.M.V.d.F.) and Radiology & Nuclear Medicine (S.C.J.V., L.E.C., F.B., B.N.M.v.B.), Amsterdam Neuroscience, and Neurochemistry Laboratory, Department of Clinical Chemistry (I.M.W.V., C.E.T.), and Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics (W.M.v.d.F.), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, the Netherlands; and UCL Institutes of Neurology and Healthcare Engineering (F.B.), London, UK.
Neurology. 2022 Mar 29;98(13):e1315-e1326. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000200035. Epub 2022 Feb 2.
Multiple biomarkers have been suggested to measure neurodegeneration (N) in the AT(N) framework, leading to inconsistencies between studies. We investigated the association of 5 N biomarkers with clinical progression and cognitive decline in individuals with subjective cognitive decline (SCD).
We included individuals with SCD from the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort and SCIENCe project, a longitudinal cohort study (follow-up 4±3 years). We used the following N biomarkers: CSF total tau (t-tau), medial temporal atrophy visual rating on MRI, hippocampal volume (HV), serum neurofilament light (NfL), and serum glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). We determined correlations between biomarkers. We assessed associations between N biomarkers and clinical progression to mild cognitive impairment or dementia (Cox regression) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) over time (linear mixed models). Models included age, sex, CSF β-amyloid (Aβ) (A), and CSF p-tau (T) as covariates, in addition to the N biomarker.
We included 401 individuals (61±9 years, 42% female, MMSE 28 ± 2, vascular comorbidities 8%-19%). N biomarkers were modestly to moderately correlated (range -0.28 - 0.58). Serum NfL and GFAP correlated most strongly ( 0.58, < 0.01). T-tau was strongly correlated with p-tau ( 0.89, < 0.01), although these biomarkers supposedly represent separate biomarker groups. All N biomarkers individually predicted clinical progression, but only HV, NfL, and GFAP added predictive value beyond Aβ and p-tau (hazard ratio 1.52 [95% CI 1.11-2.09]; 1.51 [1.05-2.17]; 1.50 [1.04-2.15]). T-tau, HV, and GFAP individually predicted MMSE slope (range β -0.17 to -0.11, < 0.05), but only HV remained associated beyond Aβ and p-tau (β -0.13 [SE 0.04]; < 0.05).
In cognitively unimpaired older adults, correlations between different N biomarkers were only moderate, indicating they reflect different aspects of neurodegeneration and should not be used interchangeably. T-tau was strongly associated with p-tau (T), which makes it less desirable to use as a measure for N. HV, NfL, and GFAP predicted clinical progression beyond A and T. Our results do not allow to choose one most suitable biomarker for N, but illustrate the added prognostic value of N beyond A and T.
This study provides Class II evidence that HV, NfL, and GFAP predicted clinical progression beyond A and T in individuals with SCD.
已有多种生物标志物被提出用于测量 AT(N)框架中的神经退行性变(N),这导致了研究之间的不一致。我们研究了 5 种 N 生物标志物与主观认知下降(SCD)个体的临床进展和认知下降之间的关联。
我们纳入了阿姆斯特丹痴呆队列和 SCIENCe 项目中的 SCD 个体,这是一个纵向队列研究(随访 4±3 年)。我们使用了以下 N 生物标志物:脑脊液总 tau(t-tau)、MRI 上的内侧颞叶萎缩视觉评分、海马体积(HV)、血清神经丝轻链(NfL)和血清神经胶质纤维酸性蛋白(GFAP)。我们确定了生物标志物之间的相关性。我们评估了 N 生物标志物与临床进展为轻度认知障碍或痴呆(Cox 回归)以及随着时间的 Mini-Mental State Examination(MMSE)之间的关联(线性混合模型)。模型包括年龄、性别、脑脊液 β-淀粉样蛋白(Aβ)(A)和脑脊液 p-tau(T)作为协变量,此外还包括 N 生物标志物。
我们纳入了 401 名个体(61±9 岁,42%为女性,MMSE 为 28±2,血管合并症为 8%-19%)。N 生物标志物之间存在中度到中度的相关性(范围为 -0.28 至 0.58)。血清 NfL 和 GFAP 的相关性最强(0.58,<0.01)。T-tau 与 p-tau 强烈相关(0.89,<0.01),尽管这些生物标志物据称代表了不同的生物标志物组。所有 N 生物标志物均单独预测了临床进展,但只有 HV、NfL 和 GFAP 除了 Aβ和 p-tau 之外还具有预测价值(危险比 1.52[95%CI 1.11-2.09];1.51[1.05-2.17];1.50[1.04-2.15])。T-tau、HV 和 GFAP 单独预测了 MMSE 斜率(范围为β-0.17 至-0.11,<0.05),但只有 HV 在 Aβ和 p-tau 之外仍与该斜率相关(β-0.13[SE 0.04];<0.05)。
在认知未受损的老年人中,不同 N 生物标志物之间的相关性仅为中度,这表明它们反映了神经退行性变的不同方面,不应互换使用。T-tau 与 p-tau(T)强烈相关,这使其不太适合作为 N 的衡量标准。HV、NfL 和 GFAP 预测了 A 和 T 之外的临床进展。我们的结果不允许选择一种最适合 N 的生物标志物,但说明了 N 除了 A 和 T 之外的额外预后价值。
本研究提供了 II 级证据,表明 HV、NfL 和 GFAP 除了 A 和 T 之外,还可预测 SCD 个体的临床进展。