A blood biomarker test for brain amyloid impacts the clinical evaluation of cognitive impairment

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine clinicians\u27 patient selection and result interpretation of a clinically validated mass spectrometry test measuring amyloid beta and ApoE blood biomarkers combined with patient age (PrecivityAD® blood test) in symptomatic patients evaluated for Alzheimer\u27s disease (AD) or other causes of cognitive decline. METHODS: The Quality Improvement and Clinical Utility PrecivityAD Clinician Survey (QUIP I, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05477056) was a prospective, single-arm cohort study among 366 patients evaluated by neurologists and other cognitive specialists. Participants underwent blood biomarker testing and received an amyloid probability score (APS), indicating the likelihood of a positive result on an amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) scan. The primary study outcomes were appropriateness of patient selection as well as result interpretation associated with PrecivityAD blood testing. RESULTS: A 95% (347/366) concordance rate was noted between clinicians\u27 patient selection and the test\u27s intended use criteria. In the final analysis including these 347 patients (median age 75 years, 56% women), prespecified test result categories incorporated 133 (38%) low APS, 162 (47%) high APS, and 52 (15%) intermediate APS patients. Clinicians\u27 pretest and posttest AD diagnosis probability changed from 58% to 23% in low APS patients and 71% to 89% in high APS patients (p \u3c 0.0001). Anti-AD drug therapy decreased by 46% in low APS patients (p \u3c 0.0001) and increased by 57% in high APS patients (p \u3c 0.0001). INTERPRETATION: These findings demonstrate the clinical utility of the PrecivityAD blood test in clinical care and may have added relevance as new AD therapies are introduced

Select Atrophied Regions in Alzheimer disease (SARA): An improved volumetric model for identifying Alzheimer disease dementia

INTRODUCTION: Volumetric biomarkers for Alzheimer disease (AD) are attractive due to their wide availability and ease of administration, but have traditionally shown lower diagnostic accuracy than measures of neuropathological contributors to AD. Our purpose was to optimize the diagnostic specificity of structural MRIs for AD using quantitative, data-driven techniques. METHODS: This retrospective study assembled several non-overlapping cohorts (total n = 1287) with publicly available data and clinical patients from Barnes-Jewish Hospital (data gathered 1990-2018). The Normal Aging Cohort (n = 383) contained amyloid biomarker negative, cognitively normal (CN) participants, and provided a basis for determining age-related atrophy in other cohorts. The Training (n = 216) and Test (n = 109) Cohorts contained participants with symptomatic AD and CN controls. Classification models were developed in the Training Cohort and compared in the Test Cohort using the receiver operating characteristics areas under curve (AUCs). Additional model comparisons were done in the Clinical Cohort (n = 579), which contained patients who were diagnosed with dementia due to various etiologies in a tertiary care outpatient memory clinic. RESULTS: While the Normal Aging Cohort showed regional age-related atrophy, classification models were not improved by including age as a predictor or by using volumetrics adjusted for age-related atrophy. The optimal model used multiple regions (hippocampal volume, inferior lateral ventricle volume, amygdala volume, entorhinal thickness, and inferior parietal thickness) and was able to separate AD and CN controls in the Test Cohort with an AUC of 0.961. In the Clinical Cohort, this model separated AD from non-AD diagnoses with an AUC 0.820, an incrementally greater separation of the cohort than by hippocampal volume alone (AUC of 0.801, p = 0.06). Greatest separation was seen for AD vs. frontotemporal dementia and for AD vs. non-neurodegenerative diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Volumetric biomarkers distinguished individuals with symptomatic AD from CN controls and other dementia types but were not improved by controlling for normal aging

Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities in the DIAN-TU-001 trial of gantenerumab and solanezumab: lessons from a trial in dominantly inherited Alzheimer disease

OBJECTIVE: To determine the characteristics of participants with amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) in a trial of gantenerumab or solanezumab in dominantly inherited Alzheimer disease (DIAD). METHODS: 142 DIAD mutation carriers received either gantenerumab SC (n=52), solanezumab IV (n=50), or placebo (n=40). Participants underwent assessments with the Clinical Dementia Rating® (CDR®), neuropsychological testing, CSF biomarkers, β-amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to monitor ARIA. Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses evaluated potential ARIA-related risk factors. RESULTS: Eleven participants developed ARIA-E, including 3 with mild symptoms. No ARIA-E was reported under solanezumab while gantenerumab was associated with ARIA-E compared to placebo (OR=9.1, CI[1.2, 412.3]; p=0.021). Under gantenerumab, APOE-ɛ4 carriers were more likely to develop ARIA-E (OR=5.0, CI[1.0, 30.4]; p=0.055), as were individuals with microhemorrhage at baseline (OR=13.7, CI[1.2, 163.2]; p=0.039). No ARIA-E was observed at the initial 225mg/month gantenerumab dose, and most cases were observed at doses >675mg. At first ARIA-E occurrence, all ARIA-E participants were amyloid-PET+, 60% were CDR>0, 60% were past their estimated year to symptom onset, and 60% had also incident ARIA-H. Most ARIA-E radiologically resolved after dose adjustment and developing ARIA-E did not significantly increase odds of trial discontinuation. ARIA-E was more frequently observed in the occipital lobe (90%). ARIA-E severity was associated with age at time of ARIA-E. INTERPRETATION: In DIAD, solanezumab was not associated with ARIA. Gantenerumab dose over 225mg increased ARIA-E risk, with additional risk for individuals APOE-ɛ4(+) or with microhemorrhage. ARIA-E was reversible on MRI in most cases, generally asymptomatic, without additional risk for trial discontinuation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Potential role of orexin and sleep modulation in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer\u27s disease

Age-related aggregation of amyloid-β (Aβ) is an upstream pathological event in Alzheimer\u27s disease (AD) pathogenesis, and it disrupts the sleep-wake cycle. The amount of sleep declines with aging and to a greater extent in AD. Poor sleep quality and insufficient amounts of sleep have been noted in humans with preclinical evidence of AD. However, how the amount and quality of sleep affects Aβ aggregation is not yet well understood. Orexins (hypocretins) initiate and maintain wakefulness, and loss of orexin-producing neurons causes narcolepsy. We tried to determine whether orexin release or secondary changes in sleep via orexin modulation affect Aβ pathology. Amyloid precursor protein (APP)/Presenilin 1 (PS1) transgenic mice, in which the orexin gene is knocked out, showed a marked decrease in the amount of Aβ pathology in the brain with an increase in sleep time. Focal overexpression of orexin in the hippocampus in APP/PS1 mice did not alter the total amount of sleep/wakefulness and the amount of Aβ pathology. In contrast, sleep deprivation or increasing wakefulness by rescue of orexinergic neurons in APP/PS1 mice lacking orexin increased the amount of Aβ pathology in the brain. Collectively, modulation of orexin and its effects on sleep appear to modulate Aβ pathology in the brain