Faculty Bibliography

Importance: Early identification of Alzheimer disease (AD) is important for clinical management and affords the opportunity to assess potential disease-modifying agents in clinical trials. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a randomized trial to prospectively enrich a study population with prodromal AD (PDAD) defined by cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker criteria and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) symptoms. Objectives: To assess the safety of the gamma-secretase inhibitor avagacestat in PDAD and to determine whether CSF biomarkers can identify this patient population prior to clinical diagnosis of dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, placebo-controlled phase 2 clinical trial with a parallel, untreated, nonrandomized observational cohort of CSF biomarker-negative participants was conducted May 26, 2009, to July 9, 2013, in a multicenter global population. Of 1358 outpatients screened, 263 met MCI and CSF biomarker criteria for randomization into the treatment phase. One hundred two observational cohort participants who met MCI criteria but were CSF biomarker-negative were observed during the same study period to evaluate biomarker assay sensitivity. Interventions: Oral avagacestat or placebo daily. Main Outcomes and Measure: Safety and tolerability of avagacestat. Results: Of the 263 participants in the treatment phase, 132 were randomized to avagacestat and 131 to placebo; an additional 102 participants were observed in an untreated observational cohort. Avagacestat was relatively well tolerated with low discontinuation rates (19.6%) at a dose of 50 mg/d, whereas the dose of 125 mg/d had higher discontinuation rates (43%), primarily attributable to gastrointestinal tract adverse events. Increases in nonmelanoma skin cancer and nonprogressive, reversible renal tubule effects were observed with avagacestat. Serious adverse event rates were higher with avagacestat (49 participants [37.1%]) vs placebo (31 [23.7%]), attributable to the higher incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer. At 2 years, progression to dementia was more frequent in the PDAD cohort (30.7%) vs the observational cohort (6.5%). Brain atrophy rate in PDAD participants was approximately double that of the observational cohort. Concordance between abnormal amyloid burden on positron emission tomography and pathologic CSF was approximately 87% (kappa = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.87). No significant treatment differences were observed in the avagacestat vs placebo arm in key clinical outcome measures. Conclusions and Relevance: Avagacestat did not demonstrate efficacy and was associated with adverse dose-limiting effects. This PDAD population receiving avagacestat or placebo had higher rates of clinical progression to dementia and greater brain atrophy compared with CSF biomarker-negative participants. The CSF biomarkers and amyloid positron emission tomography imaging were correlated, suggesting that either modality could be used to confirm the presence of cerebral amyloidopathy and identify PDAD. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00890890.

Importance: Several large-scale Alzheimer disease (AD) secondary prevention trials have begun to target individuals at the preclinical stage. The success of these trials depends on validated outcome measures that are sensitive to early clinical progression in individuals who are initially asymptomatic. Objective: To investigate the utility of the Cognitive Function Instrument (CFI) to track early changes in cognitive function in older individuals without clinical impairment at baseline. Design, Setting, and Participants: Longitudinal study from February 2002 through February 2007 at participating Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study sites. Individuals were followed up annually for 48 months after the baseline visit. The study included 468 healthy older individuals (Clinical Dementia Rating scale [CDR] global scores of 0, above cutoff on the modified Mini-Mental State Examination and Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test) (mean [SD] age, 79.4 [3.6] years; age range, 75.0-93.8 years). All study participants and their study partners completed the self and partner CFIs annually. Individuals also underwent concurrent annual neuropsychological assessment and APOE genotyping. Main Outcomes and Measures: The CFI scores between clinical progressors (CDR score, >/=0.5) and nonprogressors (CDR score, 0) and between APOE epsilon4 carriers and noncarriers were compared. Correlations of change between the CFI scores and neuropsychological performance were assessed longitudinally. Results: At 48 months, group differences between clinical progressors and non-progressors were significant for self (2.13, SE=0.45, P < .001), partner (5.08, SE=0.59, P < .001), and self plus partner (7.04, SE=0.83, P < .001) CFI total scores. At month 48, APOE epsilon4 carriers had greater progression than noncarriers on the partner (1.10, SE=0.44, P < .012) and self plus partner (1.56, SE=0.63, P < .014) CFI scores. Both self and partner CFI change were associated with longitudinal cognitive decline (self, rho=0.32, 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.46; partner, rho=0.56, 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.68), although findings suggest self-report may be more accurate early in the process, whereas accuracy of partner report improves when there is progression to cognitive impairment. Conclusions and Relevance: Demonstrating long-term clinical benefit will be critical for the success of recently launched secondary prevention trials. The CFI appears to be a brief, but informative potential outcome measure that provides insight into functional abilities at the earliest stages of disease.

Importance: Recently, a rare variant in the amyloid precursor protein gene (APP) was described in a population from Iceland. This variant, in which alanine is replaced by threonine at position 673 (A673T), appears to protect against late-onset Alzheimer disease (AD). We evaluated the frequency of this variant in AD cases and cognitively normal controls to determine whether this variant will significantly contribute to risk assessment in individuals in the United States. Objective: To determine the frequency of the APP A673T variant in a large group of elderly cognitively normal controls and AD cases from the United States and in 2 case-control cohorts from Sweden. Design, Setting, and Participants: Case-control association analysis of variant APP A673T in US and Swedish white individuals comparing AD cases with cognitively intact elderly controls. Participants were ascertained at multiple university-associated medical centers and clinics across the United States and Sweden by study-specific sampling methods. They were from case-control studies, community-based prospective cohort studies, and studies that ascertained multiplex families from multiple sources. Main Outcomes and Measures: Genotypes for the APP A673T variant were determined using the Infinium HumanExome V1 Beadchip (Illumina, Inc) and by TaqMan genotyping (Life Technologies). Results: The A673T variant genotypes were evaluated in 8943 US AD cases, 10 480 US cognitively normal controls, 862 Swedish AD cases, and 707 Swedish cognitively normal controls. We identified 3 US individuals heterozygous for A673T, including 1 AD case (age at onset, 89 years) and 2 controls (age at last examination, 82 and 77 years). The remaining US samples were homozygous for the alanine (A673) allele. In the Swedish samples, 3 controls were heterozygous for A673T and all AD cases were homozygous for the A673 allele. We also genotyped a US family previously reported to harbor the A673T variant and found a mother-daughter pair, both cognitively normal at ages 72 and 84 years, respectively, who were both heterozygous for A673T; however, all individuals with AD in the family were homozygous for A673. Conclusions and Relevance: The A673T variant is extremely rare in US cohorts and does not play a substantial role in risk for AD in this population. This variant may be primarily restricted to Icelandic and Scandinavian populations.

Reports an error in "Tracking early decline in cognitive function in older individuals at risk for Alzheimer disease dementia: The Alzheimer's disease cooperative study Cognitive Function Instrument" by Rebecca E. Amariglio, Michael C. Donohue, Gad A. Marshall, Dorene M. Rentz, David P. Salmon, Steven H. Ferris, Stella Karantzoulis, Paul S. Aisen and Reisa A. Sperling (JAMA Neurology, 2015[Apr], Vol 72[4], 446-454). In the original article, there were typographical errors in Figure.1. The corrected figure was present in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2015-18024-013). Importance: Several large-scale Alzheimer disease (AD) secondary prevention trials have begun to target individuals at the preclinical stage. The success of these trials depends on validated outcome measures that are sensitive to early clinical progression in individuals who are initially asymptomatic. Objective: To investigate the utility of the Cognitive Function Instrument (CFI) to track early changes in cognitive function in older individuals without clinical impairment at baseline. Design, Setting, and Participants: Longitudinal study from February 2002 through February 2007 at participating Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study sites. Individuals were followed up annually for 48 months after the baseline visit. The study included 468 healthy older individuals (Clinical Dementia Rating scale [CDR] global scores of 0, above cutoff on the modified Mini-Mental State Examination and Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test) (mean [SD] age, 79.4 [3.6] years; age range, 75.0-93.8 years). All study participants and their study partners completed the self and partner CFIs annually. Individuals also underwent concurrent annual neuropsychological assessment and i genotyping. Main Outcomes and Measures: The CFI scores between clinical progressors (CDR score, > 0.5) and nonprogressors (CDR score, 0) and between APOE epsilon4 carriers and noncarriers were compared. Correlations of change between the CFI scores and neuropsychological performance were assessed longitudinally. Results: At 48 months, group differences between clinical progressors and non-progressors were significant for self (2.13, SE = 0.45, P < .001), partner (5.08, SE = 0.59, P < .001), and self plus partner (7.04, SE = 0.83, P < .001) CFI total scores. At month 48, APOE epsilon4 carriers had greater progression than noncarriers on the partner (1.10, SE = 0.44, P < .012) and self plus partner (1.56, SE = 0.63, P < .014) CFI scores. Both self and partner CFI change were associated with longitudinal cognitive decline (self, rho = 0.32, 95%CI, 0.13 to 0.46; partner, rho = 0.56, 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.68), although findings suggest self-report may be more accurate early in the process, whereas accuracy of partner report improves when there is progression to cognitive impairment. Conclusions and Relevance: Demonstrating long-term clinical benefit will be critical for the success of recently launched secondary prevention trials. The CFI appears to be a brief, but informative potential outcome measure that provides insight into functional abilities at the earliest stages of disease.

BACKGROUND: Neuropsychological and depression measures have been found to predict cognitive functioning. We compared these associations among whites and Spanish-speaking Hispanics. METHODS: Fifty-two pairs of whites and Hispanics were matched demographically and clinically in a cross-sectional study. Hierarchical regression analyses predicted Global Deterioration Scale (GDS) rating by baseline neuropsychological tests and depression symptoms. RESULTS: Neuropsychological tests predicted GDS better in whites; depression symptoms-specifically retardation-predicted well in Hispanics but not whites. Immediate recall of the New York University (NYU)-Paragraph Test and the Retardation item of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale were associated with GDS in Hispanics and delayed recall of the NYU-Paragraph Test and Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Digit Symbol in whites. Neuropsychological tests and depression symptoms predicted GDS differently in Hispanics and whites. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that other measures should be considered to increase the predictive accuracy of neuropsychological tests when assessing cognitive status in Spanish-speaking Hispanics. Additional studies of specific ethnic/racial and sociodemographic subgroups are warranted.

IMPORTANCE: Because APOE locus variants contribute to risk of late-onset Alzheimer disease (LOAD) and to differences in age at onset (AAO), it is important to know whether other established LOAD risk loci also affect AAO in affected participants. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of known Alzheimer disease risk loci in modifying AAO and to estimate their cumulative effect on AAO variation using data from genome-wide association studies in the Alzheimer Disease Genetics Consortium. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Alzheimer Disease Genetics Consortium comprises 14 case-control, prospective, and family-based data sets with data on 9162 participants of white race/ethnicity with Alzheimer disease occurring after age 60 years who also had complete AAO information, gathered between 1989 and 2011 at multiple sites by participating studies. Data on genotyped or imputed single-nucleotide polymorphisms most significantly associated with risk at 10 confirmed LOAD loci were examined in linear modeling of AAO, and individual data set results were combined using a random-effects, inverse variance-weighted meta-analysis approach to determine whether they contribute to variation in AAO. Aggregate effects of all risk loci on AAO were examined in a burden analysis using genotype scores weighted by risk effect sizes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Age at disease onset abstracted from medical records among participants with LOAD diagnosed per standard criteria. RESULTS: Analysis confirmed the association of APOE with earlier AAO (P = 3.3 x 10-96), with associations in CR1 (rs6701713, P = 7.2 x 10-4), BIN1 (rs7561528, P = 4.8 x 10-4), and PICALM (rs561655, P = 2.2 x 10-3) reaching statistical significance (P < .005). Risk alleles individually reduced AAO by 3 to 6 months. Burden analyses demonstrated that APOE contributes to 3.7% of the variation in AAO (R2 = 0.256) over baseline (R2 = 0.221), whereas the other 9 loci together contribute to 2.2% of the variation (R2 = 0.242). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We confirmed an association of APOE (OMIM 107741) variants with AAO among affected participants with LOAD and observed novel associations of CR1 (OMIM 120620), BIN1 (OMIM 601248), and PICALM (OMIM 603025) with AAO. In contrast to earlier hypothetical modeling, we show that the combined effects of Alzheimer disease risk variants on AAO are on the scale of, but do not exceed, the APOE effect. While the aggregate effects of risk loci on AAO may be significant, additional genetic contributions to AAO are individually likely to be small.

BACKGROUND/METHODS: The Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Prevention Instrument Project is a longitudinal study that recruited 644 cognitively healthy older subjects (aged between 75 and 93 years, 58% women) at baseline and evaluated their cognitive change over 4 years. The study was structured like a clinical trial to anticipate a prevention trial and to determine the performance of novel trial instruments in a longitudinal non-interventional trial framework. Behavioral symptoms were assessed at baseline. RESULTS: The existence of participant-reported behavioral symptoms at baseline predicted conversion to Clinical Dementia Rating scale score >/=0.5 over the 4-year period. CONCLUSIONS: The results imply that early anxiety and depression may be harbingers of future cognitive decline, and that patients exhibiting such symptoms, even in the absence of co-occurring cognitive symptoms, should be closely followed over time.

BACKGROUND: Bapineuzumab, a humanized anti-amyloid-beta monoclonal antibody, is in clinical development for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials involving patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease--one involving 1121 carriers of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) epsilon4 allele and the other involving 1331 noncarriers. Bapineuzumab or placebo, with doses varying by study, was administered by intravenous infusion every 13 weeks for 78 weeks. The primary outcome measures were scores on the 11-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog11, with scores ranging from 0 to 70 and higher scores indicating greater impairment) and the Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicating less impairment). A total of 1090 carriers and 1114 noncarriers were included in the efficacy analysis. Secondary outcome measures included findings on positron-emission tomographic amyloid imaging with the use of Pittsburgh compound B (PIB-PET) and cerebrospinal fluid phosphorylated tau (phospho-tau) concentrations. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in the primary outcomes. At week 78, the between-group differences in the change from baseline in the ADAS-cog11 and DAD scores (bapineuzumab group minus placebo group) were -0.2 (P=0.80) and -1.2 (P=0.34), respectively, in the carrier study; the corresponding differences in the noncarrier study were -0.3 (P=0.64) and 2.8 (P=0.07) with the 0.5-mg-per-kilogram dose of bapineuzumab and 0.4 (P=0.62) and 0.9 (P=0.55) with the 1.0-mg-per-kilogram dose. The major safety finding was amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema among patients receiving bapineuzumab, which increased with bapineuzumab dose and APOE epsilon4 allele number and which led to discontinuation of the 2.0-mg-per-kilogram dose. Between-group differences were observed with respect to PIB-PET and cerebrospinal fluid phospho-tau concentrations in APOE epsilon4 allele carriers but not in noncarriers. CONCLUSIONS: Bapineuzumab did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with Alzheimer's disease, despite treatment differences in biomarkers observed in APOE epsilon4 carriers. (Funded by Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy and Pfizer; Bapineuzumab 301 and 302 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00575055 and NCT00574132, and EudraCT number, 2009-012748-17.).