Combination of plasma amyloid beta(1-42/1-40) and glial fibrillary acidic protein strongly associates with cerebral amyloid pathology

BACKGROUND: Blood-based biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) might facilitate identification of participants for clinical trials targeting amyloid beta (Abeta) accumulation, and aid in AD diagnostics. We examined the potential of plasma markers Abeta(1-42/1-40), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and neurofilament light (NfL) to identify cerebral amyloidosis and/or disease severity. METHODS: We included individuals with a positive (n = 176: 63 ± 7 years, 87 (49%) females) or negative (n = 76: 61 ± 9 years, 27 (36%) females) amyloid PET status, with syndrome diagnosis subjective cognitive decline (18 PET+, 25 PET-), mild cognitive impairment (26 PET+, 24 PET-), or AD-dementia (132 PET+). Plasma Abeta(1-42/1-40), GFAP, and NfL were measured by Simoa. We applied two-way ANOVA adjusted for age and sex to investigate the associations of the plasma markers with amyloid PET status and syndrome diagnosis; logistic regression analysis with Wald's backward selection to identify an optimal panel that identifies amyloid PET positivity; age, sex, and education-adjusted linear regression analysis to investigate associations between the plasma markers and neuropsychological test performance; and Spearman's correlation analysis to investigate associations between the plasma markers and medial temporal lobe atrophy (MTA). RESULTS: Abeta(1-42/1-40) and GFAP independently associated with amyloid PET status (p = 0.009 and p  0.33, p < 0.001). Abeta(1-42/1-40) showed a moderate negative correlation with MTA (Spearman's rho = - 0.24, p = 0.001). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Combination of plasma Abeta(1-42/1-40) and GFAP provides a valuable tool for the identification of amyloid PET status. Furthermore, plasma GFAP and NfL associate with various disease severity measures suggesting potential for disease monitoring

Plasma p-tau181/Aβ1-42 ratio predicts Aβ-PET status and correlates with CSF-p-tau181/Aβ1-42 and future cognitive decline

Background: In Alzheimer\u27s disease (AD), plasma amyloid beta (Aβ)1-42 and phosphorylated tau (p-tau) predict high amyloid status from Aβ positron emission tomography (PET); however, the extent to which combination of these plasma assays can predict remains unknown. Methods: Prototype Simoa assays were used to measure plasma samples from participants who were either cognitively normal (CN) or had mild cognitive impairment (MCI)/AD in the Australian Imaging, Biomarkers and Lifestyle (AIBL) study. Results: The p-tau181/Aβ1-42 ratio showed the best prediction of Aβ-PET across all participants (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.905, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86–0.95) and in CN (AUC = 0.873; 0.80–0.94), and symptomatic (AUC = 0.908; 0.82–1.00) adults. Plasma p-tau181/Aβ1-42 ratio correlated with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) p-tau181 (Elecsys, Spearman\u27s ρ = 0.74, P \u3c 0.0001) and predicted abnormal CSF Aβ (AUC = 0.816; 0.74–0.89). The p-tau181/Aβ1-42 ratio also predicted future rates of cognitive decline assessed by AIBL Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite or Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (P \u3c 0.0001). Discussion: Plasma p-tau181/Aβ1-42 ratio predicted both Aβ-PET status and cognitive decline, demonstrating potential as both a diagnostic aid and as a screening and prognostic assay for preclinical AD trials

PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe for the reduction of cardiovascular events: a clinical practice guideline with risk-stratified recommendations.

CLINICAL QUESTION In adults with low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels >1.8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? CURRENT PRACTICE Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event. However, to achieve these goals in very high risk patients with statins alone is almost impossible, so physicians are increasingly considering other lipid-lowering drugs solely for achieving LDL cholesterol treatment goals rather than for achieving important absolute cardiovascular risk reduction. Most guidelines do not systematically assess the cardiovascular benefits of adding PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe for all risk groups across primary and secondary prevention, nor do they report, in accordance with explicit judgments of assumed patients' values and preferences, absolute benefits and harms and potential treatment burdens. RECOMMENDATIONS The guideline panel provided mostly weak recommendations, which means we rely on shared decision making when applying these recommendations. For adults already using statins, the panel suggests adding a second lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but recommends against adding it in people at low cardiovascular risk. For adults who are intolerant to statins, the panel recommends using a lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but against adding it in those at low cardiovascular risk. When choosing to add another lipid-lowering drug, the panel suggests ezetimibe in preference to PCSK9 inhibitors. The panel suggests further adding a PCSK9 inhibitor to ezetimibe for adults already taking statins at very high risk and those at very high and high risk who are intolerant to statins. HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED An international panel including patients, clinicians, and methodologists produced these recommendations following standards for trustworthy guidelines and using the GRADE approach. The panel identified four risk groups of patients (low, moderate, high, and very high cardiovascular risk) and primarily applied an individual patient perspective in moving from evidence to recommendations, though societal issues were a secondary consideration. The panel considered the balance of benefits and harms and burdens of starting a PCSK9 inhibitor and/or ezetimibe, making assumptions of adults' average values and preferences. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids accompany multi-layered recommendations, developed in an online authoring and publication platform (www.magicapp.org) that also allows re-use and adaptation. THE EVIDENCE A linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (14 trials including 83 660 participants) of benefits found that PCSK9 inhibitors or ezetimibe probably reduce myocardial infarctions and stroke in patients with very high and high cardiovascular risk, with no impact on mortality (moderate to high certainty evidence), but not in those with moderate and low cardiovascular risk. PCSK9 inhibitors may have similar effects to ezetimibe on reducing non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke (low certainty evidence). These relative benefits were consistent, but their absolute magnitude varied based on cardiovascular risk in individual patients (for example, for 1000 people treated with PCSK9 inhibitors in addition to statins over five years, benefits ranged from 2 fewer strokes in the lowest risk to 21 fewer in the highest risk). Two systematic reviews on harms found no important adverse events for these drugs (moderate to high certainty evidence). PCSK9 inhibitors require injections that sometimes result in injection site reactions (best estimate 15 more per 1000 in a 5 year timeframe), representing a burden and harm that may matter to patients. The MATCH-IT decision support tool allows you to interact with the evidence and your patients across the alternative options: https://magicevidence.org/match-it/220504dist-lipid-lowering-drugs/. UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS The stratification into four cardiovascular risk groups means that, to use the recommendations, physicians need to identify their patient's risk first. We therefore suggest, specific to various geographical regions, using some reliable risk calculators that estimate patients' cardiovascular risk based on a mix of known risk factors. The largely weak recommendations concerning the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors reflect what the panel considered to be a close balance between small reductions in stroke and myocardial infarctions weighed against the burdens and limited harms.Because of the anticipated large variability of patients' values and preferences, well informed choices warrant shared decision making. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids linked to the recommendations can facilitate such shared decisions. The strong recommendations against adding another drug in people at low cardiovascular risk reflect what the panel considered to be a burden without important benefits. The strong recommendation for adding either ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors in people at high and very high cardiovascular risk reflect a clear benefit.The panel recognised the key uncertainty in the evidence concerning patient values and preferences, namely that what most people consider important reductions in cardiovascular risks, weighed against burdens and harms, remains unclear. Finally, availability and costs will influence decisions when healthcare systems, clinicians, or people consider adding ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors

Plasma and CSF biomarkers in a memory clinic: Head-to-head comparison of phosphorylated tau immunoassays

INTRODUCTION: Direct comparisons of the main blood phosphorylated tau immunoassays in memory clinic populations are needed to understand possible differences. METHODS: In the BIODEGMAR study, 197 participants presenting with cognitive complaints were classified into an Alzheimer's disease (AD) or a non-AD cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) profile group, according to their amyloid beta 42/ phosphorylated tau (Aβ42/p-tau) ratio. We performed a head-to-head comparison of nine plasma and nine CSF tau immunoassays and determined their accuracy to discriminate abnormal CSF Aβ42/p-tau ratio. RESULTS: All studied plasma tau biomarkers were significantly higher in the AD CSF profile group compared to the non-AD CSF profile group and significantly discriminated abnormal CSF Aβ42/p-tau ratio. For plasma p-tau biomarkers, the higher discrimination accuracy was shown by Janssen p-tau217 (r = 0.76; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.96), ADx p-tau181 (r = 0.73; AUC = 0.94), and Lilly p-tau217 (r = 0.73; AUC = 0.94). DISCUSSION: Several plasma p-tau biomarkers can be used in a specialized memory clinic as a stand-alone biomarker to detect biologically-defined AD. HIGHLIGHTS: Patients with an Alzheimer's disease cerebrospinal fluid (AD CSF) profile have higher plasma phosphorylated tau (p-tau) levels than the non-AD CSF profile group. All plasma p-tau biomarkers significantly discriminate patients with an AD CSF profile from the non-AD CSF profile group. Janssen p-tau217, ADx p-tau181, and Lilly p-tau217 in plasma show the highest accuracy to detect biologically defined AD. Janssen p-tau217, ADx p-tau181, Lilly p-tau217, Lilly p-tau181, and UGot p-tau231 in plasma show performances that are comparable to their CSF counterparts

Lipids revert inert Aβ amyloid fibrils to neurotoxic protofibrils that affect learning in mice

Although soluble oligomeric and protofibrillar assemblies of Aβ-amyloid peptide cause synaptotoxicity and potentially contribute to Alzheimer's disease (AD), the role of mature Aβ-fibrils in the amyloid plaques remains controversial. A widely held view in the field suggests that the fibrillization reaction proceeds ‘forward' in a near-irreversible manner from the monomeric Aβ peptide through toxic protofibrillar intermediates, which subsequently mature into biologically inert amyloid fibrils that are found in plaques. Here, we show that natural lipids destabilize and rapidly resolubilize mature Aβ amyloid fibers. Interestingly, the equilibrium is not reversed toward monomeric Aβ but rather toward soluble amyloid protofibrils. We characterized these ‘backward' Aβ protofibrils generated from mature Aβ fibers and compared them with previously identified ‘forward' Aβ protofibrils obtained from the aggregation of fresh Aβ monomers. We find that backward protofibrils are biochemically and biophysically very similar to forward protofibrils: they consist of a wide range of molecular masses, are toxic to primary neurons and cause memory impairment and tau phosphorylation in mouse. In addition, they diffuse rapidly through the brain into areas relevant to AD. Our findings imply that amyloid plaques are potentially major sources of soluble toxic Aβ-aggregates that could readily be activated by exposure to biological lipids

First Early Hominin from Central Africa (Ishango, Democratic Republic of Congo)

Despite uncontested evidence for fossils belonging to the early hominin genus Australopithecus in East Africa from at least 4.2 million years ago (Ma), and from Chad by 3.5 Ma, thus far there has been no convincing evidence of Australopithecus, Paranthropus or early Homo from the western (Albertine) branch of the Rift Valley. Here we report the discovery of an isolated upper molar (#Ish25) from the Western Rift Valley site of Ishango in Central Africa in a derived context, overlying beds dated to between ca. 2.6 to 2.0 Ma. We used µCT imaging to compare its external and internal macro-morphology to upper molars of australopiths, and fossil and recent Homo. We show that the size and shape of the enamel-dentine junction (EDJ) surface discriminate between Plio-Pleistocene and post-Lower Pleistocene hominins, and that the Ishango molar clusters with australopiths and early Homo from East and southern Africa. A reassessment of the archaeological context of the specimen is consistent with the morphological evidence and suggest that early hominins were occupying this region by at least 2 Ma