Abstract
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.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Article number | 102248 |
Journal | NeuroImage: Clinical |
Volume | 26 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2020 |
Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Aging
- Alzheimer disease
- Diagnostic biomarkers
- MRI
- Volumetrics
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
- Neurology
- Clinical Neurology
- Cognitive Neuroscience
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Select Atrophied Regions in Alzheimer disease (SARA): An improved volumetric model for identifying Alzheimer disease dementia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS
In: NeuroImage: Clinical, Vol. 26, 102248, 2020.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Select Atrophied Regions in Alzheimer disease (SARA)
T2 - An improved volumetric model for identifying Alzheimer disease dementia
AU - for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN)
AU - Koenig, Lauren N.
AU - Day, Gregory S.
AU - Salter, Amber
AU - Keefe, Sarah
AU - Marple, Laura M.
AU - Long, Justin
AU - LaMontagne, Pamela
AU - Massoumazada, Parinaz
AU - Snider, B. Joy
AU - Kanthamneni, Manasa
AU - Raji, Cyrus A.
AU - Ghoshal, Nupur
AU - Gordon, Brian A.
AU - Miller-Thomas, Michelle
AU - Morris, John C.
AU - Shimony, Joshua S.
AU - Benzinger, Tammie L.S.
N1 - Funding Information: Data collection and sharing for this project was supported by The Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer's Network (DIAN, U19AG032438 ) funded by the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Raul Carrea Institute for Neurological Research (FLENI), Partial support by the Research and Development Grants for Dementia from Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development , AMED, and the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI).This manuscript has been reviewed by DIAN Study investigators for scientific content and consistency of data interpretation with previous DIAN Study publications. We acknowledge the altruism of the participants and their families and contributions of the DIAN research and support staff at each of the participating sites for their contributions to this study. Funding Information: This work was supported by the Knight Alzheimer Research Imaging (KARI) Program, Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (ADRC), ADRC Center Grant (NIH/NIA P50AG005681), the Charles and Joanne Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center Support Fund, the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation (BJHF) Adult Children's Study (ACS) NIH / NIA P01AG026276 , support for image acquisition – CCIR/ICTS Human Imaging Unit (NIH/NCATS UL1TR000448 ), and support for imaging informatics – CNDA/XNAT through the Neuroimaging Informatics and Analysis Center ( 1P30NS098577 ) and R01 EB009352 . These funding sources had no involvement in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication. Funding Information: Data collection and sharing for this project was funded by the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) ( National Institutes of Health Grant U01 AG024904 ) and DOD ADNI (Department of Defense award number W81XWH-12-2-0012 ). ADNI is funded by the National Institute on Aging , the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering , and through generous contributions from the following: AbbVie, Alzheimer's Association; Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation; Araclon Biotech; BioClinica, Inc.; Biogen; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; CereSpir, Inc.; Cogstate; Eisai Inc.; Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Eli Lilly and Company; EuroImmun; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and its affiliated company Genentech, Inc.; Fujirebio; GE Healthcare; IXICO Ltd.; Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research & Development, LLC.; Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development LLC.; Lumosity; Lundbeck; Merck & Co., Inc.; Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC.; NeuroRx Research; Neurotrack Technologies; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Pfizer Inc.; Piramal Imaging; Servier; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company; and Transition Therapeutics. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research is providing funds to support ADNI clinical sites in Canada. Private sector contributions are facilitated by the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health ( www.fnih.org ). The grantee organization is the Northern California Institute for Research and Education , and the study is coordinated by the Alzheimer's Therapeutic Research Institute at the University of Southern California. ADNI data are disseminated by the Laboratory for Neuro Imaging at the University of Southern California. Funding Information: GS Day is supported by a mentored career development award (K23AG064029), through additional research/grant support from the National Institutes of Health (P01AG03991, R56AG057195, U01AG057195) and from philanthropic support of the BJHF Willman Scholar Fund. Prior research has benefited from an in-kind gift of radiopharmaceuticals from Avid Radiopharmaceuticals. GS Day holds stock in ANI Pharmaceuticals, Inc., serves as a topic editor on dementia for DynaMed Plus (EBSCO Industries, Inc.), and has provided record review and expert medical testimony on legal cases pertaining to management of Wernicke. Amber Salter receives consulting fees for statistical reviews for the journal Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging. Joy Snider does consulting with Eisai. Cyrus Raji does consulting for Brainreader ApS and Neurevolution LLC. Nupur Ghoshal has participated or is currently participating in clinical trials of anti-dementia drugs sponsored by the following companies: Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly/Avid Radiopharmaceuticals, Janssen Immunotherapy, Novartis, Pfizer, Wyeth, SNIFF (The Study of Nasal Insulin to Fight Forgetfulness) study, and A4 (The Anti-Amyloid Treatment in Asymptomatic Alzheimer's Disease) trial. Ghoshal receives research support from Tau Consortium and Association for Frontotemporal Dementia and is funded by the NIH. Michelle Miller-Thomas received payment as a site investigator for a multiple sclerosis imaging study sponsored by Biogen MA Inc. (completed May 2019), which is unrelated to this work. Miller-Thomas receives ongoing salary support from the Barnes Jewish Hospital Foundation to support her work on Neuroradiology Advanced Imaging, which is directly related to this manuscript. JC Morris is funded by NIH grants # P50AG005681; P01AG003991; P01AG026276 and UF1AG032438. Neither Dr. Morris nor his family owns stock or has equity interest (outside of mutual funds or other externally directed accounts) in any pharmaceutical or biotechnology company. Tammie Benzinger participated in clinical trials sponsored by Eli Lilly, Roche, and Biogen. Avid Radiopharmaceuticals (a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly) provided doses of 18F-florbetapir, partial funding for 18F-florbetapir scanning, precursor for 18F-flortaucipir, and technology transfer for manufacturing of 18F-flortaucipir.Data collection and sharing for this project was supported by The Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer's Network (DIAN, U19AG032438) funded by the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Raul Carrea Institute for Neurological Research (FLENI), Partial support by the Research and Development Grants for Dementia from Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development, AMED, and the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI).This manuscript has been reviewed by DIAN Study investigators for scientific content and consistency of data interpretation with previous DIAN Study publications. We acknowledge the altruism of the participants and their families and contributions of the DIAN research and support staff at each of the participating sites for their contributions to this study. Data collection and sharing for this project was funded by the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (National Institutes of Health Grant U01 AG024904) and DOD ADNI (Department of Defense award number W81XWH-12-2-0012). ADNI is funded by the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, and through generous contributions from the following: AbbVie, Alzheimer's Association; Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation; Araclon Biotech; BioClinica, Inc.; Biogen; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; CereSpir, Inc.; Cogstate; Eisai Inc.; Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Eli Lilly and Company; EuroImmun; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and its affiliated company Genentech, Inc.; Fujirebio; GE Healthcare; IXICO Ltd.; Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research & Development, LLC.; Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development LLC.; Lumosity; Lundbeck; Merck & Co. Inc.; Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC.; NeuroRx Research; Neurotrack Technologies; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Pfizer Inc.; Piramal Imaging; Servier; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company; and Transition Therapeutics. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research is providing funds to support ADNI clinical sites in Canada. Private sector contributions are facilitated by the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (www.fnih.org). The grantee organization is the Northern California Institute for Research and Education, and the study is coordinated by the Alzheimer's Therapeutic Research Institute at the University of Southern California. ADNI data are disseminated by the Laboratory for Neuro Imaging at the University of Southern California. Data were provided in part by OASIS-3: Principal Investigators: T. Benzinger, D. Marcus, J. Morris; NIH P50AG00561, P30NS09857781, P01AG026276, P01AG003991, R01AG043434, UL1TR000448, R01EB009352. Florbetapir F18 (18F-AV-45) doses were provided by Avid Radiopharmaceuticals, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly. This work was supported by the Knight Alzheimer Research Imaging (KARI) Program, Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (ADRC), ADRC Center Grant (NIH/NIA P50AG005681), the Charles and Joanne Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center Support Fund, the Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation (BJHF) Adult Children's Study (ACS) NIH/NIA P01AG026276, support for image acquisition ? CCIR/ICTS Human Imaging Unit (NIH/NCATS UL1TR000448), and support for imaging informatics ? CNDA/XNAT through the Neuroimaging Informatics and Analysis Center (1P30NS098577) and R01 EB009352. These funding sources had no involvement in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the article for publication. Publisher Copyright: © 2020
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Aging
KW - Alzheimer disease
KW - Diagnostic biomarkers
KW - MRI
KW - Volumetrics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85083698919&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85083698919&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.nicl.2020.102248
DO - 10.1016/j.nicl.2020.102248
M3 - Article
C2 - 32334404
AN - SCOPUS:85083698919
SN - 2213-1582
VL - 26
JO - NeuroImage: Clinical
JF - NeuroImage: Clinical
M1 - 102248
ER -