Balanced Crystalloids versus Saline in Critically Ill Adults — A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: The comparative efficacy and safety of balanced crystalloid solutions and saline for fluid therapy in critically ill adults remain uncertain. METHODS: We systematically reviewed randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the use of balanced crystalloids with saline in critically ill adults. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality after pooling data from low-risk-of-bias trials using a random-effects model. We also performed a Bayesian meta-analysis to describe the primary treatment effect in probability terms. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), new treatment with renal replacement therapy (RRT), and ventilator-free and vasopressor-free days to day 28. RESULTS: We identified 13 RCTs, comprising 35,884 participants. From six trials (34,450 participants) with a low risk of bias, the risk ratio (RR) for 90-day mortality with balanced crystalloids versus saline was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 1.01; I2 = 12.1%); using vague priors, the posterior probability that balanced crystalloids reduce mortality was 89.5%. The RRs of developing AKI and of being treated with RRT with balanced crystalloids versus saline were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.02) and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.81 to 1.11), respectively. Ventilator-free days (mean difference, 0.18 days; 95% CI, −0.45 to 0.81) and vasopressor-free days (mean difference, 0.19 days; 95% CI, −0.14 to 0.51) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated effect of using balanced crystalloids versus saline in critically ill adults ranges from a 9% relative reduction to a 1% relative increase in the risk of death, with a high probability that the average effect of using balanced crystalloids is to reduce mortality

Factors Associated With Death in Critically Ill Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in the US

Importance: The US is currently an epicenter of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, yet few national data are available on patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of critical illness from COVID-19. Objectives: To assess factors associated with death and to examine interhospital variation in treatment and outcomes for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study assessed 2215 adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) at 65 hospitals across the US from March 4 to April 4, 2020. Exposures: Patient-level data, including demographics, comorbidities, and organ dysfunction, and hospital characteristics, including number of ICU beds. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality. Multilevel logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with death and to examine interhospital variation in treatment and outcomes. Results: A total of 2215 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.5 [14.5] years; 1436 [64.8%] male; 1738 [78.5%] with at least 1 chronic comorbidity) were included in the study. At 28 days after ICU admission, 784 patients (35.4%) had died, 824 (37.2%) were discharged, and 607 (27.4%) remained hospitalized. At the end of study follow-up (median, 16 days; interquartile range, 8-28 days), 875 patients (39.5%) had died, 1203 (54.3%) were discharged, and 137 (6.2%) remained hospitalized. Factors independently associated with death included older age (≥80 vs <40 years of age: odds ratio [OR], 11.15; 95% CI, 6.19-20.06), male sex (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.19-1.90), higher body mass index (≥40 vs <25: OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.01-2.25), coronary artery disease (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.07-2.02), active cancer (OR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.35-3.43), and the presence of hypoxemia (Pao2:Fio2<100 vs ≥300 mm Hg: OR, 2.94; 95% CI, 2.11-4.08), liver dysfunction (liver Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of 2 vs 0: OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.30–5.25), and kidney dysfunction (renal Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of 4 vs 0: OR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.46–4.05) at ICU admission. Patients admitted to hospitals with fewer ICU beds had a higher risk of death (<50 vs ≥100 ICU beds: OR, 3.28; 95% CI, 2.16-4.99). Hospitals varied considerably in the risk-adjusted proportion of patients who died (range, 6.6%-80.8%) and in the percentage of patients who received hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, and other treatments and supportive therapies. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified demographic, clinical, and hospital-level risk factors that may be associated with death in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and can facilitate the identification of medications and supportive therapies to improve outcomes.Dr. Gupta reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and is a scientific coordinator for GlaxoSmithKline’s ASCEND (Anemia Studies in Chronic Kidney Disease: Erythropoiesis via a Novel Prolyl Hydroxylase Inhibitor Daprodustat) trial. Dr. Chan reported receiving grants from the Renal Research Institute outside the submitted work. Dr. Mathews reported receiving grants from the NIH/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) during the conduct of the study and serves on the steering committee for the BREATHE trial (Breathing Retraining for Asthma–Trial of Home Exercises), funded by Roivant/Kinevant Sciences. Dr. Melamed reported receiving honoraria from the American Board of Internal Medicine and Icon Medical Consulting. Dr. Reiser reported receiving personal fees from Biomarin, TRISAQ, Thermo BCT, Astellas, Massachusetts General Hospital, Genentech, UptoDate, Merck, Inceptionsci, GLG, and Clearview and grants from the NIH and Nephcure outside the submitted work. Dr. Srivastava reported receiving personal fees from Horizon Pharma PLC, AstraZeneca, and CVS Caremark outside the submitted work. Dr. Vijayan reported receiving personal fees from NxStage, Boeringer Ingelheim, and Sanofi outside the submitted work. Dr. Velez reported receiving personal fees from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Retrophin, and Otsuka Pharmaceuticals outside the submitted work. Dr. Shaefi reported receiving grants from the NIH/National Institute on Aging and NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences outside the submitted work. Dr. Admon reported receiving grants from the NIH/NHLBI during the conduct of the study. Dr. Donnelly reported receiving grants from the NIH/NHLBI during the conduct of the study and personal fees from the American College of Emergency Physicians/Annals of Emergency Medicine outside the submitted work. Dr. Hernán reported receiving grants from the NIH during the conduct of the study. Dr. Semler reported receiving grants from the NIH/NHLBI during the conduct of the study. No other disclosures were reported

Altered plasma protein profiles in genetic FTD – a GENFI study

© The Author(s) 2023. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.Background: Plasma biomarkers reflecting the pathology of frontotemporal dementia would add significant value to clinical practice, to the design and implementation of treatment trials as well as our understanding of disease mechanisms. The aim of this study was to explore the levels of multiple plasma proteins in individuals from families with genetic frontotemporal dementia. Methods: Blood samples from 693 participants in the GENetic Frontotemporal Dementia Initiative study were analysed using a multiplexed antibody array targeting 158 proteins. Results: We found 13 elevated proteins in symptomatic mutation carriers, when comparing plasma levels from people diagnosed with genetic FTD to healthy non-mutation controls and 10 proteins that were elevated compared to presymptomatic mutation carriers. Conclusion: We identified plasma proteins with altered levels in symptomatic mutation carriers compared to non-carrier controls as well as to presymptomatic mutation carriers. Further investigations are needed to elucidate their potential as fluid biomarkers of the disease process.Open access funding provided by Karolinska Institute. C.G. received funding from EU Joint Programme—Neurodegenerative Disease Research -Prefrontals Vetenskapsrådet Dnr 529–2014-7504, Vetenskapsrådet 2015–02926, Vetenskapsrådet 2018–02754, the Swedish FTD Inititative-Schörling Foundation, Alzheimer Foundation, Brain Foundation, Dementia Foundation and Region Stockholm ALF-project. PN received funding from KTH Center for Applied Precision Medicine (KCAP) funded by the Erling-Persson Family Foundation, the Swedish FTD Inititative-Schörling Foundation and Åhlén foundation. D.G. received support from the EU Joint Programme—Neurodegenerative Disease Research and the Italian Ministry of Health (PreFrontALS) grant 733051042. E.F. has received funding from a Canadian Institute of Health Research grant #327387. F.M. received funding from the Tau Consortium and the Center for Networked Biomedical Research on Neurodegenerative Disease. J.B.R. has received funding from the Welcome Trust (103838) and is supported by the Cambridge University Centre for Frontotemporal Dementia, the Medical Research Council (SUAG/051 G101400) and the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215–20014). J.C.V.S. was supported by the Dioraphte Foundation grant 09–02-03–00, Association for Frontotemporal Dementias Research Grant 2009, Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research grant HCMI 056–13-018, ZonMw Memorabel (Deltaplan Dementie, project number 733 051 042), Alzheimer Nederland and the Bluefield Project. J.D.R. is supported by the Bluefield Project and the National Institute for Health and Care Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, and has received funding from an MRC Clinician Scientist Fellowship (MR/M008525/1) and a Miriam Marks Brain Research UK Senior Fellowship. M.M. has received funding from a Canadian Institute of Health Research operating grant and the Weston Brain Institute and Ontario Brain Institute. M.O. has received funding from Germany’s Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). R.S-V. is supported by Alzheimer’s Research UK Clinical Research Training Fellowship (ARUK-CRF2017B-2) and has received funding from Fundació Marató de TV3, Spain (grant no. 20143810). R.V. has received funding from the Mady Browaeys Fund for Research into Frontotemporal Dementia. This work was also supported by the EU Joint Programme—Neurodegenerative Disease Research GENFI-PROX grant [2019–02248; to J.D.R., M.O., B.B., C.G., J.C.V.S. and M.S.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

A data-driven disease progression model of fluid biomarkers in genetic frontotemporal dementia

© The Author(s) (2021). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Guarantors of Brain. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact [email protected] CSF and blood biomarkers for genetic frontotemporal dementia have been proposed, including those reflecting neuroaxonal loss (neurofilament light chain and phosphorylated neurofilament heavy chain), synapse dysfunction [neuronal pentraxin 2 (NPTX2)], astrogliosis (glial fibrillary acidic protein) and complement activation (C1q, C3b). Determining the sequence in which biomarkers become abnormal over the course of disease could facilitate disease staging and help identify mutation carriers with prodromal or early-stage frontotemporal dementia, which is especially important as pharmaceutical trials emerge. We aimed to model the sequence of biomarker abnormalities in presymptomatic and symptomatic genetic frontotemporal dementia using cross-sectional data from the Genetic Frontotemporal dementia Initiative (GENFI), a longitudinal cohort study. Two-hundred and seventy-five presymptomatic and 127 symptomatic carriers of mutations in GRN, C9orf72 or MAPT, as well as 247 non-carriers, were selected from the GENFI cohort based on availability of one or more of the aforementioned biomarkers. Nine presymptomatic carriers developed symptoms within 18 months of sample collection ('converters'). Sequences of biomarker abnormalities were modelled for the entire group using discriminative event-based modelling (DEBM) and for each genetic subgroup using co-initialized DEBM. These models estimate probabilistic biomarker abnormalities in a data-driven way and do not rely on previous diagnostic information or biomarker cut-off points. Using cross-validation, subjects were subsequently assigned a disease stage based on their position along the disease progression timeline. CSF NPTX2 was the first biomarker to become abnormal, followed by blood and CSF neurofilament light chain, blood phosphorylated neurofilament heavy chain, blood glial fibrillary acidic protein and finally CSF C3b and C1q. Biomarker orderings did not differ significantly between genetic subgroups, but more uncertainty was noted in the C9orf72 and MAPT groups than for GRN. Estimated disease stages could distinguish symptomatic from presymptomatic carriers and non-carriers with areas under the curve of 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.80-0.89) and 0.90 (0.86-0.94) respectively. The areas under the curve to distinguish converters from non-converting presymptomatic carriers was 0.85 (0.75-0.95). Our data-driven model of genetic frontotemporal dementia revealed that NPTX2 and neurofilament light chain are the earliest to change among the selected biomarkers. Further research should investigate their utility as candidate selection tools for pharmaceutical trials. The model's ability to accurately estimate individual disease stages could improve patient stratification and track the efficacy of therapeutic interventions.This study was supported in the Netherlands by two Memorabel grants from Deltaplan Dementie (The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development and Alzheimer Nederland; grant numbers 733050813,733050103 and 733050513), the Bluefield Project to Cure Frontotemporal Dementia, the Dioraphte foundation (grant number 1402 1300), the European Joint Programme—Neurodegenerative Disease Research and the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (PreFrontALS: 733051042, RiMod-FTD: 733051024); V.V. and S.K. have received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 666992 (EuroPOND). E.B. was supported by the Hartstichting (PPP Allowance, 2018B011); in Belgium by the Mady Browaeys Fonds voor Onderzoek naar Frontotemporale Degeneratie; in the UK by the MRC UK GENFI grant (MR/M023664/1); J.D.R. is supported by an MRC Clinician Scientist Fellowship (MR/M008525/1) and has received funding from the NIHR Rare Disease Translational Research Collaboration (BRC149/NS/MH); I.J.S. is supported by the Alzheimer’s Association; J.B.R. is supported by the Wellcome Trust (103838); in Spain by the Fundació Marató de TV3 (20143810 to R.S.V.); in Germany by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy within the framework of the Munich Cluster for Systems Neurology (EXC 2145 SyNergy—ID 390857198) and by grant 779357 ‘Solve-RD’ from the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (to MS); in Sweden by grants from the Swedish FTD Initiative funded by the Schörling Foundation, grants from JPND PreFrontALS Swedish Research Council (VR) 529–2014-7504, Swedish Research Council (VR) 2015–02926, Swedish Research Council (VR) 2018–02754, Swedish Brain Foundation, Swedish Alzheimer Foundation, Stockholm County Council ALF, Swedish Demensfonden, Stohnes foundation, Gamla Tjänarinnor, Karolinska Institutet Doctoral Funding and StratNeuro. H.Z. is a Wallenberg Scholar.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Examining empathy deficits across familial forms of frontotemporal dementia within the GENFI cohort

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).Background: Reduced empathy is a common symptom in frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Although empathy deficits have been extensively researched in sporadic cases, few studies have explored the differences in familial forms of FTD. Methods: Empathy was examined using a modified version of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (mIRI) in 676 participants from the Genetic FTD Initiative: 216 mutation-negative controls, 192 C9orf72 expansion carriers, 193 GRN mutation carriers and 75 MAPT mutation carriers. Using global scores from the CDR® plus NACC FTLD, mutation carriers were divided into three groups, asymptomatic (0), very mildly symptomatic/prodromal (.5), or fully symptomatic (1 or more). The mIRI Total score, as well as the subscores of Empathic Concern (EC) and Perspective Taking (PT) were assessed. Linear regression models with bootstrapping were used to assess empathy ratings across genetic groups, as well as across phenotypes in the symptomatic carriers. Neural correlates of empathy deficits were examined using a voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analysis. Results: All fully symptomatic groups scored lower on the mIRI Total, EC, and PT when compared to controls and their asymptomatic or prodromal counterparts (all p < .001). Prodromal C9orf72 expansion carriers also scored significantly lower than controls on the mIRI Total score (p = .046). In the phenotype analysis, all groups (behavioural variant FTD, primary progressive aphasia and FTD with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) scored significantly lower than controls (all p < .007). VBM revealed an overlapping neural correlate of the mIRI Total score across genetic groups in the orbitofrontal lobe but with additional involvement in the temporal lobe, insula and basal ganglia in both the GRN and MAPT groups, and uniquely more posterior regions such as the parietal lobe and thalamus in the GRN group, and medial temporal structures in the MAPT group. Conclusions: Significant empathy deficits present in genetic FTD, particularly in symptomatic individuals and those with a bvFTD phenotype, while prodromal deficits are only seen using the mIRI in C9orf72 expansion carriers.This work was supported by the NIHR UCL/H Biomedical Research Centre, the Leonard Wolfson Experimental Neurology Centre (LWENC) Clinical Research Facility, and the UK Dementia Research Institute, which receives its funding from UK DRI Ltd, funded by the UK Medical Research Council, Alzheimer's Society and Alzheimer's Research UK. JDR is supported by an MRC Clinician Scientist Fellowship (MR/M008525/1) and has received funding from the NIHR Rare Disease Translational Research Collaboration (BRC149/NS/MH). This work was also supported by the MRC UK GENFI grant (MR/M023664/1), the Bluefield Project and the JPND GENFI-PROX grant (2019-02248). Several authors of this publication are members of the European Reference Network for Rare Neurological Diseases - Project ID No 739510. RC/CG are supported by a Frontotemporal Dementia Research Studentships in Memory of David Blechner funded through The National Brain Appeal (RCN 290173). MB is supported by a Fellowship award from the Alzheimer's Society, UK (AS-JF-19a-004-517). MB's work is also supported by the UK Dementia Research Institute which receives its funding from DRI Ltd, funded by the UK Medical Research Council, Alzheimer's Society and Alzheimer's Research UK. JCVS was supported by the Dioraphte Foundation grant 09-02-03-00, the Association for Frontotemporal Dementias Research Grant 2009, The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research grant HCMI 056-13-018, ZonMw Memorabel (Deltaplan Dementie, project number 733 051 042), Alzheimer Nederland and the Bluefield project. FM received funding from the Tau Consortium and the Center for Networked Biomedical Research on Neurodegenerative Disease (CIBERNED). RS-V is supported by an Alzheimer’s Research UK Clinical Research Training Fellowship (ARUK-CRF2017B-2), and has received funding from Fundació Marató de TV3, Spain (grant no. 20143810). CG received funding from JPND-Prefrontals VR Dnr 529-2014-7504, VR 2015-02926 and 2018-02754, the Swedish FTD Inititative-Schörling Foundation, Alzheimer Foundation, Brain Foundation and Stockholm County Council ALF. MM has received funding from a Canadian Institute of Health Research operating grant and the Weston Brain Institute and Ontario Brain Institute. JBR has received funding from the Wellcome Trust (103838) and is supported by the Cambridge University Centre for Frontotemporal Dementia, the Medical Research Council (SUAG/051 G101400) and the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014). EF has received funding from a CIHR grant #327387. DG received support from the EU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease Research and the Italian Ministry of Health (PreFrontALS) grant 733051042. RV has received funding from the Mady Browaeys Fund for Research into Frontotemporal Dementia. MO has received funding from BMBF (FTLDc).info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Association Between Early Treatment With Tocilizumab and Mortality Among Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

Importance: Therapies that improve survival in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are needed. Tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against the interleukin 6 receptor, may counteract the inflammatory cytokine release syndrome in patients with severe COVID-19 illness. Objective: To test whether tocilizumab decreases mortality in this population. Design, Setting, and Participants: The data for this study were derived from a multicenter cohort study of 4485 adults with COVID-19 admitted to participating intensive care units (ICUs) at 68 hospitals across the US from March 4 to May 10, 2020. Critically ill adults with COVID-19 were categorized according to whether they received or did not receive tocilizumab in the first 2 days of admission to the ICU. Data were collected retrospectively until June 12, 2020. A Cox regression model with inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for confounding. Exposures: Treatment with tocilizumab in the first 2 days of ICU admission. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to death, compared via hazard ratios (HRs), and 30-day mortality, compared via risk differences. Results: Among the 3924 patients included in the analysis (2464 male [62.8%]; median age, 62 [interquartile range {IQR}, 52-71] years), 433 (11.0%) received tocilizumab in the first 2 days of ICU admission. Patients treated with tocilizumab were younger (median age, 58 [IQR, 48-65] vs 63 [IQR, 52-72] years) and had a higher prevalence of hypoxemia on ICU admission (205 of 433 [47.3%] vs 1322 of 3491 [37.9%] with mechanical ventilation and a ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen of <200 mm Hg) than patients not treated with tocilizumab. After applying inverse probability weighting, baseline and severity-of-illness characteristics were well balanced between groups. A total of 1544 patients (39.3%) died, including 125 (28.9%) treated with tocilizumab and 1419 (40.6%) not treated with tocilizumab. In the primary analysis, during a median follow-up of 27 (IQR, 14-37) days, patients treated with tocilizumab had a lower risk of death compared with those not treated with tocilizumab (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.92). The estimated 30-day mortality was 27.5% (95% CI, 21.2%-33.8%) in the tocilizumab-treated patients and 37.1% (95% CI, 35.5%-38.7%) in the non-tocilizumab–treated patients (risk difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, 3.1%-16.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19 in this cohort study, the risk of in-hospital mortality in this study was lower in patients treated with tocilizumab in the first 2 days of ICU admission compared with patients whose treatment did not include early use of tocilizumab. However, the findings may be susceptible to unmeasured confounding, and further research from randomized clinical trials is needed.The writing committee was supported by grants F32HL149337 (Dr. Admon), K23DK120811 (Dr. Srivastava), R01HL085757 (Dr. Parikh), R01HL144566 and R01DK125786 (Dr. Leaf), K12HL138039 (Dr. Donnelly), K23HL130648 (Dr. Mathews), R37AI102634 (Dr. Hernán), F32DC017342 (Dr. Gupta), K08GM134220 and R03AG060179 (Dr. Shaefi), K23HL143053 (Dr. Semler), and R01HL153384 (Dr. Hayek) from the NIH and grant U-M G024231 from the Frankel Cardiovascular Center COVID-19: Impact Research Ignitor (Dr. Hayek)

Disease-related cortical thinning in presymptomatic granulin mutation carriers

Mutations in the granulin gene (GRN) cause familial frontotemporal dementia. Understanding the structural brain changes in presymptomatic GRN carriers would enforce the use of neuroimaging biomarkers for early diagnosis and monitoring. We studied 100 presymptomatic GRN mutation carriers and 94 noncarriers from the Genetic Frontotemporal dementia initiative (GENFI), with MRI structural images. We analyzed 3T MRI structural images using the FreeSurfer pipeline to calculate the whole brain cortical thickness (CTh) for each subject. We also perform a vertex-wise general linear model to assess differences between groups in the relationship between CTh and diverse covariables as gender, age, the estimated years to onset and education. We also explored differences according to TMEM106B genotype, a possible disease modifier. Whole brain CTh did not differ between carriers and noncarriers. Both groups showed age-related cortical thinning. The group-by-age interaction analysis showed that this age-related cortical thinning was significantly greater in GRN carriers in the left superior frontal cortex. TMEM106B did not significantly influence the age-related cortical thinning. Our results validate and expand previous findings suggesting a