Blood biomarkers of neurodegeneration associate differently with amyloid deposition, medial temporal atrophy, and cerebrovascular changes in APOE ε4-enriched cognitively unimpaired elderly

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3124100/v1

Background: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques, neurofibrillary tau tangles, and neurodegeneration in the brain parenchyma. Here, we aimed to i) assess differences in blood and imaging biomarkers used to evaluate neurodegeneration among cognitively unimpaired APOE ε4 homozygotes, heterozygotes, and non-carriers with varying risk for sporadic AD, and ii) to determine how different cerebral pathologies (i.e., Aβ deposition, medial temporal atrophy, and cerebrovascular pathology) contribute to blood biomarker concentrations in this sample.

Methods: Sixty APOE ε4 homozygotes (n = 19), heterozygotes (n = 21), and non-carriers (n = 20) ranging from 60–75 years, were recruited in collaboration with Auria biobank (Turku, Finland). Participants underwent Aβ-PET ([¹¹C]PiB), structural brain MRI including T1-weighted and T2-FLAIR sequences, and blood sampling for measuring serum neurofilament light chain (NfL), plasma total tau (t-tau), plasma N-terminal tau fragments (NTA-tau) and plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). [¹¹C]PiB standardized uptake value ratio was calculated for regions typical for Aβ accumulation in AD. MRI images were analysed for regional volumes, atrophy scores, and volumes of white matter hyperintensities. Differences in biomarker levels and associations between blood and imaging biomarkers were tested using uni- and multivariable linear models (unadjusted and adjusted for age and sex).

Results: Serum NfL concentration was increased in APOE ε4 homozygotes compared with non-carriers (mean 21.4 pg/ml (SD 9.5) vs. 15.5 pg/ml (3.8), p = 0.013), whereas other blood biomarkers did not differ between the groups (p > 0.077 for all). From imaging biomarkers, hippocampal volume was significantly decreased in APOE ε4 homozygotes compared with non-carriers (6.71 ml (0.86) vs. 7.2 ml (0.7), p = 0.029). In the whole sample, blood biomarker levels were differently predicted by the three measured cerebral pathologies; serum NfL concentration was associated with cerebrovascular pathology and medial temporal atrophy, while plasma NTA-tau associated with medial temporal atrophy. Plasma GFAP showed significant association with both medial temporal atrophy and Aβ pathology. Plasma t-tau concentration did not associate with any of the measured pathologies.

Conclusions: Only increased serum NfL concentrations and decreased hippocampal volume was observed in cognitively unimpaired APOEε4 homozygotes compared to non-carriers. In the whole population the concentrations of blood biomarkers were affected in distinct ways by different pathologies.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia, and it is estimated that over 400 million individuals worldwide are in the AD continuum which constituents a decade long asymptomatic phase (1). AD is characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and neurofibrillary tau tangles in the brain parenchyma, accompanied by neurodegeneration (2). Hereditary factors play a significant role in the prevalence of AD (3), and the epsilon 4 allele of apolipoprotein E gene (APOE ε4) is the strongest genetic risk factor associated with sporadic AD (4). The APOE ε4 allele has a dose-dependent effect on the prevalence of AD, with individuals carrying one APOE ε4 allele having a three times greater risk for AD, and those with two APOE ε4 alleles having a risk 14.9 times higher when compared with individuals without APOE ε4 alleles (5). APOE ε4 is well-known for increasing Aβ accumulation in AD (6, 7) and is linked to neurodegeneration in AD as well as other neurodegenerative diseases (8, 9). In addition to the risk of AD, APOE ε4 increases the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease (10–12).

Current clinically validated biomarkers for AD require cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sampling or brain imaging. In vivo detection of Aβ and tau pathologies involves CSF measurements (CSF Aβ42/40 and p-tau181, respectively) or the use of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging, while neurodegeneration is typically assessed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or CSF total tau (t-tau) measurements (13). However, these diagnostic methods are not universally available in all healthcare settings, can be associated with significant patient discomfort, and are often expensive. To address these challenges, the development of easily accessible blood-based biomarkers for AD has shown great promise, and many new biomarkers have recently been introduced (14), although they are not yet established or implemented in clinical practice.

Various blood biomarkers are already available for studying neurodegenerative disorders: CSF neurofilament light chain (NfL) and CSF t-tau are clinically used biomarkers of neuroaxonal injury and neurodegeneration that can also be measured in blood (15, 16). Plasma NfL is increased in AD and in other neurodegenerative conditions (16), making it unspecific for any particular disease or condition (17, 16). Effect sizes compared with neurologically healthy controls are lower in AD than in frontotemporal dementia (FTD), some parkinsonian disorders and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) (16). On the other hand, there are confounding effects of age (17, 18) and BMI (19) on plasma NfL levels. Furthermore, NfL levels are also linked to cerebrovascular pathologies (20) including white matter changes (21). Plasma t-tau has been shown to be associated with neurodegeneration (22, 23), tau-PET (24), and cognitive functions (22, 23, 25), but its use is restricted by wide overlap between diagnostic conditions (26, 27). To overcome this, other tau biomarkers targeting different epitopes have recently been introduced and studied in relation to neurodegeneration and AD (28–30). One of the latest is a biomarker targeting soluble N-terminal tau fragments (NTA-tau). CSF NTA-tau concentrations are increased in AD and rapidly progressive neurodegenerative diseases, such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) (23). Additionally, higher plasma NTA-tau levels have been reported in symptomatic AD patients compared with controls, showing a stronger association with tau PET than Aβ PET or neurodegeneration (28, 31). Finally, astrocytes are known to be activated in neurodegeneration (32) and in the presence of Aβ (33), and at present, it is possible to measure glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), a marker of astrocytic activation, in blood. Previously, higher plasma GFAP concentration has been associated with the incidence and faster progression of AD (34–37).

Even though blood biomarkers have been extensively studied during recent years, comparisons evaluating subtle differences in both blood and imaging biomarker measurements between genetic risk groups are not available. In addition, since APOE ε4 is known to increase the risk of Aβ, tau, and vascular pathologies, it is important to further investigate which pathologies contribute to blood biomarker concentrations in these populations. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the associations of the aforementioned imaging and blood biomarkers in a cohort comprised of cognitively unimpaired individuals with varying APOE ε4-related genetic risk for sporadic AD. The objectives of our study were twofold: 1) To evaluate the differences in blood and imaging biomarkers among cognitively normal APOE ε4 homozygotes (ε4ε4), heterozygotes (ε4ε3), and non-carriers, and 2) to examine head-to-head within the entire cohort the extent to which different pathologies (Aβ, medial temporal atrophy, cerebrovascular pathology) explain the levels of different blood-based biomarkers.

Study population

This study was part of a larger research project, and a detailed study protocol has been previously reported (30). To summarize, the participants of this cross-sectional observational study were recruited in collaboration with the local Auria biobank. Main inclusion criteria were 60–75 years of age and a CERAD total score > 62 points at screening. Exclusion criteria were dementia or cognitive impairment, any neurological or psychiatric disease, diabetes, chronic inflammatory condition, and contraindication for MRI or PET imaging. Our cohort included subjects with one, two, or no APOE ε4 alleles, and all underwent brain PET and MRI imaging, and blood sample collection. The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland. All participants signed written informed consent.

Blood biomarkers

Venous EDTA-plasma and serum samples were acquired after a 10–12 h fasting period as reported previously (30) according to in-house standard operating procedures. Samples were gently inverted 5–10 times, centrifuged (2200 × g, 10 min), aliquoted, and stored at − 80◦C prior to biomarker analysis.

All blood biomarkers were measured at the Clinical Neurochemistry Laboratory, University of Gothenburg (Mölndal, Sweden) using the Single molecule array method and HD-X analysers (Quanterix). Commercial kits provided by Quanterix were used to measure single analyte serum NfL (Simoa® NF-light™, #103186, Quanterix), plasma GFAP (Simoa® GFAP discovery, #102336, Quanterix), and plasma t-tau (Simoa® Tau Advantage, #101552, Quanterix). Measurements were performed following the instructions provided by the manufacturer. Briefly, randomized samples were first thawed at room temperature, vortexed (2000 rpm, 10 min, at room temperature), centrifuged (4000 × g, 10 min, at room temperature) and plated. Internal quality control samples were included to the beginning and end of the plate. Calibrators and controls were analysed in duplicates, samples in singlicates. Plasma GFAP concentrations have been reported before (38), and were added here to further investigate the association of GFAP with the biomarkers.

Plasma NTA-tau was measured using an in-house assay, described in detail elsewhere (31, 39). Briefly, the NTA assay targets soluble N-terminal tau fragments (phosphorylated and non-phosphorylated), and utilizes mouse monoclonal antibodies targeting amino acids (aa) 159–163 (HT7, #MN1000, ThermoScientific, used as a capture antibody) and aa 6–18 (Tau12, BioLegend, used as detector ). Sample handling was done as previously described, and after plating, samples were diluted 1:2 using the assay diluent (Tau 2.0, Quanterix). Calibrators and controls were always analysed as duplicates, samples as singlicates, and non-phosphorylated full-length Tau-441 (SignalChem) was used as an assay calibrator.

Brain imaging

All subjects underwent a structural brain MRI including T1-weighted and T2-FLAIR sequences. Structural brain images were acquired by two different scanners, either with Philips Ingenuity 3.0 T TF PET/MRI (n = 38; Philips Healthcare, Amsterdam, the Netherlands) or Philips Ingenia 3.0 T (n = 22; Philips Healthcare, Amsterdam, the Netherlands).

MRI was used to acquire volumetric variables (hippocampal volume, parahippocampal volume and entorhinal volume), global cortical atrophy score, medial temporal lobe atrophy score, and total volume of white matter hyperintensities. To determine brain Aβ load, [¹¹C]PiB PET scans (n = 60) were acquired from 40 to 90 minutes post injection (mean injected dose 497 (30) MBq) with an ECAT high-resolution research tomograph (HRRT, Siemens Medical Solutions, Knoxville, TN).

Brain image analysis

PET and MRI image preprocessing and analysis were performed using an automated pipeline at Turku PET Centre (40), which executed the PET data frame by frame realignment, PET-MRI co-registration, FreeSurfer region of interest (ROI) parcellation and PET data kinetic modelling. Regional and voxel level [¹¹C]PiB binding was quantified as standardized uptake value ratios (SUVR) calculated for 60 to 90 min post injection using the cerebellar cortex as the reference region. The Aβ PET results have been published earlier in more detail (38). For this study, a composite neocortical [¹¹C]PiB score was calculated as the volume weighted average of the [¹¹C]PiB region-to-cerebellar cortex SUVRs for the lateral frontal, lateral temporal, and parietal cortices as well as the posterior cingulate, anterior cingulate, and precuneus. This composite [¹¹C]PiB score was used to estimate brain Aβ load and its association with blood biomarkers.

The brain MRI images were segmented automatically using an automatic cNeuro image analysis tool (Combinostics Oy, Tampere, Finland) (41–43). Segmentation was done from T1- and T2-weighted MRI, and each voxel was labelled based on which region it belongs to, using multi-atlas segmentation of 133 regions (42). The structural MRI images were analysed for i) volumes of different brain regions (hippocampus, parahippocampus and entorhinal cortex) and atrophy scores (global cortical atrophy and medial temporal lobe atrophy) as a proxy for neurodegeneration, and iii) volumes of white matter hyperintensities for estimation of existing cerebrovascular pathology. For volumetric analysis, we focused on the hippocampus, parahippocampus, and the entorhinal cortex due to their known association with neurodegeneration related to AD (44). Global cortical atrophy score (continuous measure, range 0–3) was estimated computationally using voxel-based morphometry for the whole cortex and brain lobes (43). Medial temporal lobe atrophy score (continuous measure, range 0–4) was estimated computationally from the volumes of the hippocampus and inferior lateral ventricle from the T1-weighted MR images, and an average was calculated from the left and right sides (43). Volumes of white matter hyperintensities (ml) were segmented from T2-FLAIR images (41). Voxel -based morphometry analysis was conducted from T1-weighted MRI using SPM12 (http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm) running on MATLAB R2021b (Math-Works, Natick, MA, USA) to assess group differences in cerebral grey matter at the voxel level.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using JMP Pro 16.0.0 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA). All data following a normal distribution are presented as mean (standard deviation, SD), otherwise as median (interquartile range, IQR). The normality of the data was evaluated visually from the distribution and with the Shapiro-Wilk test. Differences in continuous variables (blood and imaging biomarker levels) between the three APOE groups were tested using linear regression models, adjusting for age and sex. If a significant effect was found, all pairs were compared using the post hoc Tukey’s honest significance test for multiple comparisons. Correlations between the MRI variables and blood biomarker concentrations were evaluated using Spearman's rank correlation in the whole sample and within the APOE groups.

In addition to group -level differences in biomarker concentrations, we further tested the effect of different pathologies (Aβ, medial temporal atrophy, cerebrovascular pathology) on the blood biomarker concentrations in our cognitively unimpaired sample enriched with APOE ε4 carriers. In all linear regression models, Aβ pathology was estimated by composite neocortical [¹¹C]PiB SUVR, neurodegeneration by the medial temporal lobe atrophy score, and cerebrovascular pathology by total volume of white matter hyperintensities. During this project, two different MRI scanners were used for collecting data; thus, in all models that included MRI -derived variables, the MRI scanner was included as a covariate. First, we performed univariate independent regression models with each of the blood biomarkers (serum NfL, plasma NTA-tau, plasma t-tau, plasma GFAP) as a response variable and each pathology as a predictor (Model 1: Blood biomarker ~ Pathology marker). Next, we ran the same models adjusting for age, sex and BMI (Model 2: Blood biomarker ~ Pathology marker + age + sex + BMI). To determine if the different pathologies had an effect simultaneously, we combined all three pathology markers as predictors in the same model (Model 3: Blood biomarker ~ All pathology markers). In the last model, we again added sex, age, and BMI as covariates to the multivariate model including all pathologies as predictors (Model 4: Blood biomarker ~ All pathology markers + age + sex + BMI). The normality assumption was evaluated based on the residuals and confirmed visually and calculated using the Shapiro-Wilk test. If the normality assumption was not fulfilled the blood biomarker values were log transformed, after which normality assumption was met. Variance inflation factor values were used to check that the independent variables were not highly correlated with each other. Adjusted R-squared (R²) was used to evaluate how well the models fit the data.

Voxel-wise volumetric differences between the APOE groups were tested using linear regression in statistical parametric mapping (SPM12) to evaluate if structural differences were present also outside the a priori chosen brain regions. Uncorrected p < 0.001 combined with a cluster-level false discovery rate (FDR) correction for multiple comparisons was considered statistically significant in the voxel-based analyses. When significant FDR corrected clusters were found we applied family wise error (FWE) correction with p < 0.05 to see if the results survived the tighter threshold.

Participant demographics

Demographic and descriptive data are presented in Table 1. One subject from the APOE ε4ε4 group was excluded from the analysis due to abnormal brain structure. No significant differences in age (p = 0.75), sex (p = 0.91), education (p = 0.37) or BMI (p = 0.86) were observed between the APOE groups. In the whole study population, age correlated positively with serum NfL concentration (Rho = 0.36, p = 0.0051) and global cortical atrophy score (Rho = 0.37, p = 0.0034). On the contrary, age correlated negatively with hippocampal volume (Rho = -0.30, p = 0.018) and total volume of white matter hyperintensities (Rho = -0.27 p = 0.033). Higher BMI correlated with lower serum NfL concentrations (Rho = -0.29, p = 0.024).

Table 1 Demographics and descriptive data of the APOE ε4 homozygotes, heterozygotes, and non-carriers included in the study

	*APOE ε4ε4*	*APOE ε4ε3*	*APOE ε3ε3*	p
n	18	21	20
Age (y), mean (SD)	67.3 (4.74)	67.3 (4.90)	68.3 (4.55)	0.75
Sex (M/F),n(%)	7/12 (37/63)	7/14 (33/67)	8/12 (40/60)	0.91
Education, n (%)				0.37
Primary school	7 (37)	4 (19)	7 (35)
Middle or comprehensive school	4 (21)	4 (19)	3 (15)
High school	7 (37)	6 (29)	7 (35)
College or university	1 (5)	7 (33)	3 (15)
MMSE, median (IQR)	28 (27–29)	29 (28–30) *	29 (27–30)	0.039
BMI (kg/m2), mean (SD)	26.6 (4.48)	26.7 (3.46)	27.3 (4.96)	0.86
Serum NfL pg/ml, mean (SD)	21.1 (9.34)*	17.8 (7.19)	15.5 (3.83)	0.011
Plasma NTA, median (IQR)	0.1 (0.03–0.24)	0.1 (0.049–0.18)	0.14 (0.05–0.25)	0.65
Plasma t-tau, mean (SD)	1.48 (0.75)	1.52 (0.53)	1.46 (0.55)	0.52
Plasma GFAP, median (IQR)	186 (124–269)	150 (104–170)	128 (105–147)	0.077
[¹¹C]PIB composite SUVR, median (IQR)	2.13(1.61–2.83)*	1.55 (1.43–2.02)	1.47 (1.38–1.66)	0.0024
WMH (ml), median (IQR)	4.37 (2.58–10.45)	4.70 (3.06–5.97)	3.92 (1.89–8.71)	0.36
Medial temporal atrophy score, median (IQR)	0.08 (0–0.76)	0.09 (0–0.35)	0.01 (0–0.36)	0.53
Global cortical atrophy score, median (IQR)	0.12 (1.67^e-7–1.12)	0.05 (1.67^e-7–0.28)	0.04 (1.67^e-7–0.34)	0.52
Hippocampus volume (ml), mean (SD)	6.62 (0.92)*	7.02 (0.79)	7.27 (0.70)	0.041
Entorhinal volume (ml), mean (SD)	4.23 (0.65)	4.47 (0.38)	4.52 (0.36)	0.13
Parahippocampal volume (ml), mean (SD)	5.50 (0.71)	5.8 (0.52)	5.89 (0.60)	0.12
Data are presented as mean (standard deviation) or median (interquartile range) depending on the distribution. Differences between groups were tested with one-way ANOVA with Tukey's honest significance test, or Kruskal-Wallis test with Steel-Dwass method for multiple comparisons for continuous variables. χ2 test was used for testing categorical variables. P-value presents overall difference between groups. Significant differences in pairwise comparisons to APOE ε4ε4 homozygotes (*) are also presented. Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; MMSE, mini-mental state examination; SUVR, standardized uptake value ratio; Serum NfL, Neurofilament light; Plasma NTA, N-terminal tau; Plasma t-tau, Quanterix total tau; Plasma GFAP, Glial fibrillary acidic protein; WMH, volumes of white matter hyperintensities.

Blood biomarkers across APOE groups

Statistically significant differences between the APOE groups were found for serum NfL (p = 0.018), but not for plasma NTA-tau (p = 0.97), plasma t-tau (p = 0.95) or plasma GFAP (p = 0.077) (Figure 1). Post hoc comparisons between groups showed that serum NfL concentrations were significantly higher in the APOE ε4ε4 (21.4 pg/ml (9.5); mean (SD)) compared with non-carriers (15.5 pg/ml (3.8)) (p = 0.013, Tukey HSD), whereas differences between the APOE ε4ε3 (17.8 pg/ml (7.2)) and APOE ε4ε4 (p = 0.24) or non-carriers (p = 0.37) were not statistically significant.

Structural MRI findings across APOE groups

For imaging markers of neurodegeneration, statistically significant differences among the APOE groups were found only for hippocampal volume (p = 0.041), that was significantly lower in the APOE ε4ε4 (6.71 ml, 0.86; mean, SD) compared with non-carriers (7.2 ml, 0.7, p = 0.029) (Figure 2). No differences were present between the APOE ε4ε4 and APOE ε4ε3 (7.0 ml, 0.80, p = 0.26) or between the APOE ε4ε3 and non-carriers (p = 0.42). No significant APOE group differences were seen in global cortical atrophy score (p = 0.52), medial temporal lobe atrophy score (p = 0.52), volumes of white matter hyperintensities (p = 0.36), entorhinal volume (p = 0.13) or parahippocampal volume (p = 0.12).

We then further analysed differences in grey matter volume between the APOE groups using voxel-based morphometry. When the significance threshold was set to FWE corrected p < 0.05, significantly lower volume was found in the left hippocampal region of APOE ε4ε4 carriers compared with non-carriers (Figure 3, blue scale). With a more lenient threshold of FDR corrected p < 0.001, broader reductions in grey matter volumes were found mainly in the hippocampal and parahippocampal regions of APOE ε4ε4 carriers compared with non-carriers (Figure 3, green scale). With the FDR corrected p < 0.001 threshold, lower grey matter volumes were also present in the APOE ε4ε4 compared with the APOE ε4ε3 group in the medial temporal lobe and frontal regions. Also, with the FDR-corrected threshold, small reductions in the volume of the right putamen were seen in APOE ε4ε3 compared with non-carriers.

Correlations between imaging and blood biomarkers

In the whole study population, higher global cortical atrophy score correlated with higher serum NfL concentrations (Rho = 0.40, p = 0.0017). We then performed additional exploratory analysis stratifying by the APOE group and found that all correlations were significant only in the APOE ε4ε4 group. In the APOE ε4ε4 group, higher global cortical atrophy score correlated with higher serum NfL (Rho = 0.78, p = 0.00010) and higher plasma GFAP concentrations (Rho = 0.53, p = 0.024). Higher medial temporal atrophy score correlated with both higher plasma NTA-tau (Rho = 0.61, p = 0.0097) and serum NfL concentrations (Rho = 0.63, p = 0.0049). No significant correlations were seen in the APOE ε4ε3 group or non-carriers.

Effect of Aβ, medial temporal atrophy, cerebrovascular pathology on blood biomarker concentrations

Next, we tested in the whole cohort, what proportion of the variation in blood biomarker concentrations was explained by Aβ pathology (estimated with [¹¹C]PiB PET), cerebrovascular pathology (estimated with total white matter lesion volume) and medial temporal. Blood biomarkers were set as response variables and pathology markers as predictors in all linear regression models. The blood biomarker values were log transformed, so that the models residuals fulfilled the normal assumption.

In univariate unadjusted (Model 1) and adjusted regression models (Model 2), we first looked at the effect of each pathology separately to a single blood biomarker (serum NfL, plasma NTA-tau, plasma t-tau, plasma GFAP) to. Cerebrovascular pathology had a positive association with serum NfL concentrations in Model 1 (R² = 0.18, p = 0.0021, Table 2) and in Model 2, when further adjusting for age, sex, and BMI (R² = 0.33, p = 0.013, Table 3). Medial temporal atrophy had a similar positive association with serum NfL concentrations in univariate Model 1 (R² = 0.14, p = 0.011, Table 2) and in adjusted Model 2 (R² = 0.32, p = 0.023, Table 3).

Medial temporal atrophy was also positively associated with plasma NTA-tau levels both in the unadjusted (R² = 0.19, p = 0.0056, Table 2) and adjusted model (R² = 0.15, p = 0.0063, Table 3).

In addition, medial temporal atrophy had a significant effect on plasma GFAP levels in both the unadjusted (R² = 0.11, p = 0.0042, Table 2) and adjusted model (R² = 0.15, p = 0.0034, Table 3). Aβ pathology was positively associated only with plasma GFAP levels, both alone (R² = 0.10, p = 0.0088, Table 2) and when adjusted for demographic variables (R² = 0.13, p = 0.0082, Table 3).

None of the pathology markers significantly explained variance in plasma t-tau concentrations (Tables 2 & 3).

Table 2. Model 1 Linear regression results between a blood biomarker and an imaging biomarker

Serum NfL

Plasma NTA

Plasma t-tau

Plasma GFAP

Predictors

Estimate

R²

p

Estimate

R²

p

Estimate

R²

p

Estimate

R²

p

WMH, slope (95% CI)

0.011 (0.0044 to 0.019)

0.18

0.0021

0.0047(-0.012 to 0.022)

0.072

0.58

-0.004 (-0.012 to 0.0036)

0.075

0.29

0.0064 (-0.0023 to 0.015)

0.0066

0.14

MTA, slope (95% CI)

0.16 (0.038 to 0.28)

0.14

0.011

0.42 (0.13 to 0.71)

0.19

0.0056

0.063 (-0.045 to 0.21)

0.082

0.21

0.20 (0.067 to 0.34)

0.11

0.0042

PiB, slope (95% CI)

0.15 (-0.029 to 0.32)

0.030

0.10

0.16 (-0.26 to 0.58)

-0.0080

0.46

0.074 (-0.12 to 0.27)

-0.0075

0.44

0.26 (0.069 to 0.46)

0.10

0.0088

Serum NfL = neurofilament light, Plasma NTA = N-terminal tau marker, Plasma t-tau = Quanterix total tau marker, Plasma GFAP = glial fibrillary acidic protein, WMH = volumes of white matter hyperintensities, MTA = medial temporal lobe atrophy score, PiB = [¹¹C]PiB composite score. Blood biomarker values are log transformed. WMH and MTA adjusted for MRI scanner. P < 0.05 are bolded. Blood biomarker values were log transformed.

Table 3. Model 2 adjusted linear regression results between a blood biomarker and an imaging biomarker

Serum NfL

Plasma NTA

Plasma t-tau

Plasma GFAP

Predictors

Estimate

R²

p

Estimate

R²

p

Estimate

R²

p

Estimate

R²

p

WMH, slope (95% CI)

0.0088 (0.0019 to 0.016)

0.33

0.013

0.007 (-0.011 to 0.025)

0.027

0.49

-0.004 (-0.012 to 0.0037)

0.11

0.28

0.0037 (-0.0054 to 0.013)

0.015

0.41

MTA, slope (95% CI)

0.13 (0.019 to 0.24)

0.32

0.023

0.44 (0.13 to 0.76)

0.15

0.0063

-0.12 (-0.010 to 0.25)

0.14

0.072

0.22 (0.075 to 0.36)

0.15

0.0034

PiB, slope (95% CI)

0.14 (-0.026 to 0.30)

0.20

0.099

0.12 (-0.33 to 0.56)

-0.054

0.60

0.05 (-0.15 to 0.25)

0.045

0.61

0.27 (0.073 to 0.47)

0.13

0.0082

Serum NfL = neurofilament light, Plasma NTA = N-terminal tau marker, Plasma t-tau = Quanterix total tau marker, Plasma GFAP = glial fibrillary acidic protein, WMH = volumes of white matter hyperintensities, MTA = medial temporal lobe atrophy score, PiB = [¹¹C]PiB composite score. Blood biomarker values are log transformed. Results adjusted for Age, Sex and BMI. WMH and MTA also adjusted for MRI scanner. Significant values are bolded. Blood biomarker values were log transformed.

In the multivariate linear regression models (Model 3 and Model 4, Tables 3 & 4), when we combined all three pathology markers as predictors, the results were aligned with the previously presented models. For serum NfL, both models were statistically significant (R² = 0.22, p = 0.0016 for Model 3, and R² = 0.32, p = 0.0002 for Model 4 including covariates) and in both models, cerebrovascular pathology was the predictor showing a significant effect on the outcome (Model 3, p = 0.0062; Model 4, p = 0.039). In Model 3, medial temporal atrophy also had a significant effect on serum NfL levels (p = 0.042), but this was dampened when further adjusting for age, sex, and BMI (p = 0.076).

For plasma NTA-tau, both multivariate regression models were significant (R² = 0.18, p = 0.0066 and R² = 0.14, p = 0.044, Tables 3 & 4), and only medial temporal atrophy contributed significantly to these models (Model 3, p = 0.0063; Model 4, p = 0.0082).

For plasma GFAP, both models were significant (R² = 0.18, p = 0.0058 and R² = 0.21, p = 0.0069, Tables 4 & 5). In both models, Aβ pathology and medial temporal atrophy had a similar significant effect on plasma GFAP concentration (Model 3, p = 0.025 and p = 0.026; Model 4, p = 0.013 and p = 0.018 for medial temporal lobe atrophy score, [¹¹C]PiB SUVR, respectively).

Last, in the models explaining plasma t-tau concentrations Model 3 was not significant (R² = 0.081, p = 0.080, Table 4). Model 4 crossed the threshold of p < 0.05 with all covariates (R² = 0.14, p = 0.041, Table 5), but in the model the only significant covariate was the MRI scanner (p = 0.048).

Table 4. Model 3 results for the blood biomarkers and the imaging biomarkers

Serum NfL

Plasma NTA

Plasma t-tau

Plasma GFAP

R² = 0.22 p = 0.0016

R² = 0.18 p = 0.0066

R² = 0.081 p = 0.080

R² = 0.18 p = 0.0058

Predictors

Estimate

F ratio

Std β

Estimate

F ratio

Std β

Estimate

F ratio

Std β

Estimate

F ratio

Std β

WMH. slope (95% CI)

0.0098 (0.0029 to 0.017)**

8.12

0.34

0.0015 (-0.015 to 0.022)

0.032

0.022

-0.0047 (-0.012 to 0.0030)

1.51

-0.16

0.0039 (-0.0041 to 0.12)

0.95

0.12

MTA. slope (95% CI)

0.12 (0.0044 to 0.23)*

4.34

0.25

0.45 (0.13 to 0.76)**

8.10

0.37

0.09 (-0.042 to 0.22)

1.85

0.18

0.16 ( 0.020 to 0.29)*

5.29

0.29

PiB. slope (95% CI)

0.058 (-0.11 to 0.23)

0.85

0.11

-0.11 (-0.51 to 0.76)

0.28

-0.068

0.017 (-0.17 to 0.21)

0.032

0.025

0.22 (0.028 to 0.42)*

5.27

0.29

Serum NfL = neurofilament light, Plasma NTA = N-terminal tau marker, Plasma t-tau = Quanterix total tau marker, Plasma GFAP = glial fibrillary acidic protein, WMH = volumes of white matter hyperintensities, MTA = medial temporal lobe atrophy score, PiB = [¹¹C]PiB composite score, Blood biomarker values are log transformed, Results adjusted for MRI scanner. Significant values are bolded.

Blood biomarker values were log transformed. *p<0.05. **p<0.01. ***p<0.001

Table 5. Model 4 adjusted results for the blood biomarkers and the imaging biomarkers

Serum NfL

Plasma NTA

Plasma t-tau

Plasma GFAP

R² = 0.32 p = 0.0002

R² = 0.14 p = 0.044

R² = 0.14 p = 0.041

R² = 0.21 p = 0.0069

Predictors

Estimate

F ratio

Std β

Estimate

F ratio

Std β

Estimate

F ratio

Std β

Estimate

F ratio

Std β

WMH. slope (95% CI)

0.0073 (0.00038 to 0.014)*

4.48

0.25

0.0024 (-0.016 to 0.020)

0.073

0.037

-0.0057 (-0.014 to 0.0023)

2.02

-0.19

0.00043 (-0.0080 to 0.089)

0.011

0.013

MTA. slope (95% CI)

0.10 (-0.011 to 0.21)

3.27

0.21

0.45 (0.12 to 0.79)**

7.60

0.38

0.13 (-0.0024 to 0.27)

3.90

0.27

0.18 (0.041 to 0.32)*

6.70

0.33

PiB. slope (95% CI)

0.070 (-0.087 to 0.23)

0.38

0.10

-0.092 (-0.51 to 0.33)

0.19

-0.059

0.014 (-0.18 to 0.21)

0.022

0.020

0.23 (0.043 to 0.43)*

6.04

0.31

Serum NfL = neurofilament light, Plasma NTA = N-terminal tau marker, Plasma t-tau = Quanterix total tau marker, Plasma GFAP = glial fibrillary acidic protein, WMH = volumes of white matter hyperintensities, MTA = medial temporal lobe atrophy score, PiB = [¹¹C]PiB composite score, Blood biomarker values are log transformed, Results adjusted for Age, Sex, BMI and MRI scanner. Significant values are bolded.

Blood biomarker values were log transformed. *p<0.05. **p<0.01. ***p<0.001

In this study, we examined early differences in blood biomarker concentrations, cortical volumes, white matter hyperintensities and grey matter atrophy scores, which serve as biomarkers of neurodegeneration, in a cohort of cognitively unimpaired participants with different numbers of APOE ε4 alleles, and thereby varying risk for sporadic AD. Additionally, we investigated how the different pathologies (cerebrovascular pathology, medial temporal atrophy and Aβ pathology) explained the concentrations of blood biomarkers, using the entire cognitively unimpaired sample enriched with APOE ε4 carriers. Our main findings revealed that serum NfL concentrations were significantly increased, and hippocampal volume was significantly decreased in cognitively unimpaired APOE ε4 homozygotes compared with non-carriers. Second, in the whole sample, we observed different associations of cerebrovascular pathology, medial temporal atrophy and Aβ deposition with the blood biomarkers used to estimate neurodegeneration. Specifically, serum NfL levels were associated with cerebrovascular pathology and medial temporal atrophy, whereas plasma NTA-tau was associated only with medial temporal atrophy. Lastly, plasma GFAP was associated with medial temporal atrophy and Aβ pathology, while plasma t-tau levels could not be explained by any of the assessed pathologies.

The hippocampus is one of the first brain regions where structural changes become visible in the AD continuum (45). Our study demonstrated that the volumetric differences between APOE4 gene dose groups were present only in the hippocampus. While ROI analysis revealed a statistically significant difference only between the APOE ε4ε4 group and non-carriers in hippocampal volumes, a visible linear trend related to APOE ε4 allele burden existed across the groups. This finding was further supported by the VBM analysis, which showed a significant difference in hippocampal volume between the APOE ε4ε4 group and non-carriers even when using a strict FWE-corrected threshold, and exhibited a difference between the APOE ε4ε4 and ε4ε3 groups with FDR-corrected threshold. Our findings agree with previous results regarding the loss of hippocampal volume in healthy APOE ε4 carriers (46). Furthermore, in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or AD, hippocampal volume decreases have been observed in relation to APOE ε4 status (47–49).

NfL concentrations measured from blood are elevated in AD and other neurodegenerative diseases (15, 16). Here we found serum NfL concentrations to be elevated already in cognitively unimpaired APOE ε4ε4 carriers compared with non-carriers. This finding is consistent with a recent study that reported differences between cognitively unimpaired non-carriers and both the APOE ε4ε4 and ε4ε3 groups (50). Previously significant differences in CSF NfL concentration between APOE ε4 carriers and non-carriers from prodromal AD patients has been reported (51). In contrast to our findings, Mielke (2019) did not observe any effect of APOE ε4 on plasma or CSF NfL levels in cognitively unimpaired subjects (52). However, the APOE ε4 status was reported only as positive or negative, categorizing subjects as carriers if they had at least one APOE ε4 allele, whereas we evaluated homozygotic and heterozygotic APOE4 carriers separately. Additionally, most subjects were non-carriers, whereas in our study, the different APOE groups were well balanced. If we use the binarized, APOE ε4 positive and negative categorisation, the difference between APOE ε4 carriers and non-carriers in our sample is still statistically significant (p = 0.035).

We found that higher serum NfL concentration was associated with cerebrovascular pathology, estimated from the volume of white matter hyperintensities, and neurodegeneration in the medial temporal lobe. The effect of cerebrovascular pathology seemed to be stronger as it was the only explaining predictor in the model with all pathologies and demographic covariates. This concurs with a study in an elderly population with high prevalence of cerebral small vessel disease burden where plasma NfL was associated with both neurodegenerative and vascular pathologies (53). White matter hyperintensities are considered markers of cerebral small vessel disease, indicating increased water content and mobility, demyelination, and axonal loss (54), while NfL is a nonspecific marker of axonal damage (15, 55). Previous studies have demonstrated an increase in CSF NfL levels with an increased number of white matter hyperintensities (56–58). Similar associations have been observed with plasma NfL in neuropathologically confirmed AD (59), AD dementia (60) and serum NfL in neurologically unaffected individuals (17). These studies have also shown a significant influence of age on blood NfL levels, whereas in our study, the association of white matter hyperintensities with NfL was independent of age. NfL levels are known to rise with age (17, 18), but compared with the previous studies, our population was in a somewhat narrow age range (67 (4.7) years) and was enriched with APOE ε4ε4 carriers. APOE ε4 is associated with increased white matter hyperintensities (12, 61) so in this population, the effect of white matter hyperintensities on serum NfL concentration appeared to be more significant than age. Previous findings suggest that plasma NfL increases in response to amyloid-related neuronal injury in preclinical stages of Alzheimer’s disease, but is related to tau-mediated neurodegeneration in symptomatic patients. (21). However, in our analyses, Aβ-PET did not show any association with serum NfL concentrations, and the biomarker levels were primarily explained by the extent of cerebrovascular pathology. In addition to the association between white matter hyperintensities and NfL, we also found that, neurodegeneration, as estimated here by the medial temporal lobe atrophy score, was associated with higher serum NfL concentrations. In previous studies, plasma NfL has been associated with decreased volumes in the temporal cortex and hippocampal volume in subjects without dementia (62), and CSF NfL to decrease in whole brain and hippocampus volumes (63). However, this association was weakened when adjusting for simultaneous effects of different pathologies and demographic variables.

NTA-tau is a novel biomarker of soluble, N-terminal tau fragments, recently suggested to be more related to tau tangle pathology (as estimated by tau PET), than Aβ-PET or neurodegeneration (31). Here, we demonstrated an association between neurodegeneration and NTA-tau in a cognitively normal sample, enriched with “at-risk” individuals. (39). In CSF, NTA-tau has previously been found to be increased in CSF Aβ-positive individuals with MCI due to AD and AD. Similarly, plasma NTA-tau concentrations have been shown to be elevated in AD dementia compared with controls in a clinical pilot cohort (39). In a study evaluating plasma NTA-tau levels along the AD continuum, it was observed that NTA-tau exhibited a stronger association with tau-PET compared with Aβ -PET. Additionally, plasma NTA-tau predicted tau-PET accumulation in middle to late Braak regions and neurodegeneration in the medial temporal lobe. These findings suggest that NTA-tau could serve as a tool for detecting and monitoring pathological changes associated with middle to late stages of AD (31). Interestingly, in our study, we found that NTA-tau is associated with medial temporal lobe atrophy already in cognitively unimpaired subjects. This finding may be explained by the fact that our cohort is highly enriched with homozygous APOE ε4 carriers. APOE ε4 is known to be linked to elevated tau accumulation in the medial temporal lobe, and tau itself is an independent driver of neurodegeneration (64–69). In contrast, plasma t-tau did not show any associations with the neuroimaging biomarkers in our study. Although plasma t-tau was one of the first immunoassays measuring soluble tau in blood in the context of AD, it exhibits substantial overlap across diagnostic groups (25, 26). While CSF t-tau does reflect the intensity of neuronal and axonal degeneration and damage in the brain (70), in blood, tau can also originate from peripheral tissues, limiting its utility in neurological diagnosis (71, 72).

Plasma GFAP is a protein constituent of astrocyte intermediate filaments and elevated GFAP concentrations are thought to reflect astrocyte activation and reactive gliosis linked with several CNS disorders e.g. neurotrauma, ischemic stroke or neurodegenerative diseases (73). In our study, we found that GFAP was the only blood biomarker associated with the level of Aβ pathology estimated by PET. This is in line with previous findings where higher plasma GFAP concentrations have been associated with higher Aβ load determined using PET imaging (36, 37, 74, 75) and in genetic forms of AD (76, 77). Astrocytes are activated and express GFAP in the context of neurodegeneration (32) and in the presence of Aβ (33). In AD, higher plasma GFAP levels have been associated with the incidence and faster progression of AD (34–37). Plasma GFAP is also able to differentiate Aβ-positive and Aβ-negative cognitively unimpaired individuals (34, 36, 37, 74). Here, also medial temporal atrophy was associated with higher plasma GFAP concentrations. This is likely explained by activation of the astroglia by the subtle neurodegeneration present already in the medial temporal lobe of APOE ε4 carriers. Another explanation could be the type of astrocytes located in the medial temporal lobe as high GFAP expressing astrocytes have been found in the murine hippocampus (78, 79).

The strength of this study is in conducting a comparison of the impact of various pathologies on multiple blood biomarkers used to study neurodegenerative processes. Furthermore, it employs a meticulously selected population with a balanced distribution of subjects across the three APOE-genotypes. This approach enables a precise detection of the effects attributed to the APOE ε4 allele.

There are also limitations in this study. Firstly, it is important to note that the associations between the pathologies and blood biomarkers in the general population may differ from those observed in this study, as the sample used was heavily enriched with APOE ε4 carriers, a third of the sample comprising of individuals who were rare homozygotes. Additionally, the groups were relatively small for between group blood biomarkers comparisons, as the study’s initial power calculations were primarily focused on PET imaging biomarkers. Furthermore, the study lacked tau-PET measurements, which prevented the evaluation of the effect of tau-pathology on the blood biomarkers.

We investigated the differences associated with the APOE ε4 allele in both imaging and blood biomarkers of neurodegenerative disorders. Our findings revealed that individuals who were APOE ε4 homozygotes exhibited significant grey matter loss in the hippocampus, as well as elevated levels of serum NfL compared with non-carriers. Moreover, within our whole cohort, we demonstrated that Aβ deposition, cerebrovascular pathology, and medial temporal atrophy have distinct influences on the concentrations of the examined blood biomarkers. This study significantly contributes to our understanding of the relationship between the APOE ε4 gene, blood biomarkers, and imaging-based pathology markers in the early stages of the AD pathologic continuum. These findings have the potential to facilitate the development of novel diagnostic and prognostic tools for neurodegenerative diseases, particularly in the preclinical phase.

Aβ Beta-amyloid

AD Alzheimer's disease

ALS Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

APOE Apolipoprotein E gene

BMI Body mass index

CNS Central nervous system

CSF Cerebrospinal fluid

FTD Frontotemporal dementia

GFAP Glial fibrillary acidic protein

NfL Neurofilament light chain

NTA-tau N-terminal tau fragments

MRI Magnetic resonance imaging

MTA Medial temporal lobe atrophy

PET Positron emission tomography

ROI Region of interest

Simoa Single molecule array

SUVR Standardized uptake value ratio

t-tau total tau

VBM Volume based morphometry

WMH White matter hyperintensities

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland. All participants signed a written informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Availability of data and materials

The data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

HZ has served at scientific advisory boards and/or as a consultant for Abbvie, Acumen, Alector, Alzinova, ALZPath, Annexon, Apellis, Artery Therapeutics, AZTherapies, CogRx, Denali, Eisai, Nervgen, Novo Nordisk, Optoceutics, Passage Bio, Pinteon Therapeutics, Prothena, Red Abbey Labs, reMYND, Roche, Samumed, Siemens Healthineers, Triplet Therapeutics, and Wave, has given lectures in symposia sponsored by Cellectricon, Fujirebio, Alzecure, Biogen, and Roche, and is a co-founder of Brain Biomarker Solutions in Gothenburg AB (BBS), which is a part of the GU Ventures Incubator Program (outside submitted work). KB has served as a consultant and at advisory boards for Acumen, ALZPath, BioArctic, Biogen, Eisai, Lilly, Moleac Pte. Ltd, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Prothena, Roche Diagnostics, and Siemens Healthineers; has served at data monitoring committees for Julius Clinical and Novartis; has given lectures, produced educational materials and participated in educational programs for AC Immune, Biogen, Celdara Medical, Eisai and Roche Diagnostics; and is a co-founder of Brain Biomarker Solutions in Gothenburg AB (BBS), which is a part of the GU Ventures Incubator Program, outside the work presented in this paper.

Funding

This study was funded by the Academy of Finland (#310962 and #341059) and the Finnish Governmental Research Funding (ERVA) for Turku University Hospital. AES was further supported by the Emil Aaltonen Foundation, the Paulo Foundation, and the Orion Research Foundation sr. LLE was supported by the Emil Aaltonen Foundation and the Juho Vainio foundation. JR has received funding from the Academy of Finland (#310962), Sigrid Juselius Foundation. HZ is a Wallenberg Scholar supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council (#2022-01018 and #2019-02397), the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101053962, Swedish State Support for Clinical Research (#ALFGBG-71320), the Alzheimer Drug Discovery Foundation (ADDF), USA (#201809-2016862), the AD Strategic Fund and the Alzheimer's Association (#ADSF-21-831376-C, #ADSF-21-831381-C, and #ADSF-21-831377-C), the Bluefield Project, the Olav Thon Foundation, the Erling-Persson Family Foundation, Stiftelsen för Gamla Tjänarinnor, Hjärnfonden, Sweden (#FO2022-0270), the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 860197 (MIRIADE), the European Union Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease Research (JPND2021-00694), the National Institute for Health and Care Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre, and the UK Dementia Research Institute at UCL (UKDRI-1003). KB is supported by the Swedish Research Council (#2017-00915 and #2022-00732), the Swedish Alzheimer Foundation (#AF-930351, #AF-939721 and #AF-968270), Hjärnfonden, Sweden (#FO2017-0243 and #ALZ2022-0006), the Swedish state under the agreement between the Swedish government and the County Councils, the ALF-agreement (#ALFGBG-715986 and #ALFGBG-965240), the European Union Joint Program for Neurodegenerative Disorders (JPND2019-466-236), the Alzheimer’s Association 2021 Zenith Award (ZEN-21-848495), and the Alzheimer’s Association 2022-2025 Grant (SG-23-1038904 QC).

Authors' contributions

M.K., J.O.R and A.S. designed the study concept. M.K. drafted the manuscript. A.S., L.L.E., M.K., JL-R, J.L., S.H., J.L., and R.P. contributed to data collection. M.K. and A.S. analyzed data. M.K., J.O.R, A.S., L.L.E, N.J.A., T.K.K., J.L., H.Z., and K.B., contributed to study design and interpretation of the data. J.O.R., A.S., H.Z. and K.B. supervised the study. All authors read and critically revised the manuscript for its content and approved the final submitted version.

Acknowledgements

The participants of the study are warmly acknowledged for their commitment to the study. The authors would also like to acknowledge the staff of Turku PET Centre data collection for this study.

Gustavsson A, Norton N, Fast T, Frölich L, Georges J, Holzapfel D, et al. Global estimates on the number of persons across the Alzheimer's disease continuum. Alzheimer's & Dementia. 2023;19(2):658-70.
Jack CR, Bennett DA, Blennow K, Carrillo MC, Dunn B, Haeberlein SB, Holtzman DM, et al. NIA-AA Research Framework: Toward a biological definition of Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2018;14(4).
Bekris LM, Yu C-E, Bird TD, Tsuang DW. Review Article: Genetics of Alzheimer Disease. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology. 2010;23(4):213-27.
Corder EH, Saunders AM, Strittmatter WJ, Schmechel DE, Gaskell PC, Small GW, et al. Gene Dose of Apolipoprotein E Type 4 Allele and the Risk of Alzheimer's Disease in Late Onset Families. Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 1993;261(5123):921-3.
Farrer LA, Cupples LA, Haines JL, Hyman B, Kukull WA, Mayeux R, et al. Effects of age, sex and ethnicity on the association between apolipoprotein E genotype and Alzheimer disease. A meta-analysis. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association. 1998;279:581-2.
Liu C-C, Kanekiyo T, Xu H, Bu G. Apolipoprotein E and Alzheimer disease: risk, mechanisms and therapy. Nature Reviews Neurology. 2013;9(2):106-18.
Ossenkoppele R, Jansen WJ, Rabinovici GD, Knol DL, Van Der Flier WM, Van Berckel BNM, et al. Prevalence of Amyloid PET Positivity in Dementia Syndromes. JAMA. 2015;313(19):1939.
Yin Y, Wang Z. ApoE and Neurodegenerative Diseases in Aging. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology: Springer Singapore; 2018. p. 77-92.
Giau VV, Bagyinszky E, An SSA, Kim SY. Role of apolipoprotein E in neurodegenerative diseases. Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment. 2015;11(default):1723-37.
Mahley RW. Apolipoprotein E: from cardiovascular disease to neurodegenerative disorders. Journal of Molecular Medicine. 2016;94(7):739-46.
Marais AD. Apolipoprotein E in lipoprotein metabolism, health and cardiovascular disease. Pathology. 2019;51(2):165-76.
Schilling S, DeStefano AL, Sachdev PS, Choi SH, Mather KA, DeCarli CD, et al. APOE genotype and MRI markers of cerebrovascular disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurology. 2013;81(3):292-300.
Scheltens P, De Strooper B, Kivipelto M, Holstege H, Chételat G, Teunissen CE, et al. Alzheimer's disease. The Lancet. 2021;397(10284):1577-90.
Zetterberg H, Schott JM. Blood biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease and related disorders. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica. 2022;146(1):51-5.
Gaetani L, Blennow K, Calabresi P, Di Filippo M, Parnetti L, Zetterberg H. Neurofilament light chain as a biomarker in neurological disorders. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 2019;90(8):870-81.
Ashton NJ, Janelidze S, Al Khleifat A, Leuzy A, van der Ende EL, Karikari TK, et al. A multicentre validation study of the diagnostic value of plasma neurofilament light. Nature communications. 2021;12(1):3400-.
Khalil M, Pirpamer L, Hofer E, Voortman MM, Barro C, Leppert D, et al. Serum neurofilament light levels in normal aging and their association with morphologic brain changes. Nature Communications. 2020;11(1).
Vermunt L, Otte M, Verberk IMW, Killestein J, Lemstra AW, Van Der Flier WM, et al. Age‐ and disease‐specific reference values for neurofilament light presented in an online interactive support interface. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology. 2022;9(11):1832-7.
Manouchehrinia A, Piehl F, Hillert J, Kuhle J, Alfredsson L, Olsson T, et al. Confounding effect of blood volume and body mass index on blood neurofilament light chain levels. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology. 2020;7(1):139-43.
Duering M, Konieczny MJ, Tiedt S, Baykara E, Tuladhar AM, Leijsen EV, et al. Serum Neurofilament Light Chain Levels Are Related to Small Vessel Disease Burden. Journal of Stroke. 2018;20(2):228-38.
Benedet AL, Leuzy A, Pascoal TA, Ashton NJ, Mathotaarachchi S, Savard M, et al. Stage-specific links between plasma neurofilament light and imaging biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease. Brain (London, England : 1878). 2020;143(12):3793-804.
Dage JL, Wennberg AMV, Airey DC, Hagen CE, Knopman DS, Machulda MM, et al. Levels of tau protein in plasma are associated with neurodegeneration and cognitive function in a population‐based elderly cohort. Alzheimer's & Dementia. 2016;12(12):1226-34.
Xiao Z, Wu X, Wu W, Yi J, Liang X, Ding S, et al. Plasma biomarker profiles and the correlation with cognitive function across the clinical spectrum of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy. 2021;13(1).
Jong-Chan P, Sun-Ho H, Dahyun Y, Min Soo B, Lee JH, Sukjin J, et al. Plasma tau/amyloid-β1-42 ratio predicts brain tau deposition and neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease. Brain (London, England : 1878). 2019;142(5):e19-e.
Mattsson N, Zetterberg H, Janelidze S, Insel PS, Andreasson U, Stomrud E, et al. Plasma tau in Alzheimer disease. Neurology. 2016;87(17):1827-35.
Zetterberg H, Wilson D, Andreasson U, Minthon L, Blennow K, Randall J, et al. Plasma tau levels in Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy. 2013;5(2):9.
Simrén J, Leuzy A, Karikari TK, Hye A, Benedet AL, Lantero‐Rodriguez J, et al. The diagnostic and prognostic capabilities of plasma biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & Dementia. 2021;17(7):1145-56.
Snellman A, Lantero-Rodriguez J, Emeršič A, Vrillon A, Karikari TK, Ashton NJ, et al. N-terminal and mid-region tau fragments as fluid biomarkers in neurological diseases. Brain. 2022;145(8):2834-48.
Gonzalez-Ortiz F, Turton M, Kac PR, Smirnov D, Premi E, Ghidoni R, et al. Brain-derived tau: a novel blood-based biomarker for Alzheimer's disease-type neurodegeneration. Brain (London, England : 1878). 2022.
Mengel D, Janelidze S, Glynn RJ, Liu W, Hansson O, Walsh DM. Plasma NT1 Tau is a Specific and Early Marker of Alzheimer's Disease. Annals of Neurology. 2020;88(5):878-92.
Lantero‐Rodriguez J, Tissot C, Snellman A, Servaes S, Benedet AL, Rahmouni N, et al. Plasma and CSF concentrations of N‐terminal tau fragments associate with in vivo neurofibrillary tangle burden. Alzheimer's & Dementia. 2023.
Heneka MT, Rodríguez JJ, Verkhratsky A. Neuroglia in neurodegeneration. Brain Research Reviews. 2009;63(1):189-211.
Medeiros R, LaFerla FM. Astrocytes: Conductors of the Alzheimer disease neuroinflammatory symphony. Experimental neurology. 2013;239:133-8.
Chatterjee P, Pedrini S, Stoops E, Goozee K, Villemagne VL, Asih PR, et al. Plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein is elevated in cognitively normal older adults at risk of Alzheimer's disease. Translational psychiatry. 2021;11(1).
Cicognola C, Janelidze S, Hertze J, Zetterberg H, Blennow K, Mattsson-Carlgren N, et al. Plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein detects Alzheimer pathology and predicts future conversion to Alzheimer dementia in patients with mild cognitive impairment. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2021;13(1).
Pereira JB, Janelidze S, Smith R, Mattsson-Carlgren N, Palmqvist S, Teunissen CE, et al. Plasma GFAP is an early marker of amyloid-β but not tau pathology in Alzheimer's disease. Brain : a journal of neurology. 2021;144(11).
Shir D, Graff‐Radford J, Hofrenning EI, Lesnick TG, Przybelski SA, Lowe VJ, et al. Association of plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) with neuroimaging of Alzheimer's disease and vascular pathology. Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring. 2022;14(1).
Snellman A, Ekblad LL, Tuisku J, Koivumäki M, Ashton NJ, Lantero-Rodriguez J, et al. APOE ε4 gene dose effect on imaging and blood biomarkers of neuroinflammation and beta-amyloid in cognitively unimpaired elderly. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy. 2023;15(1).
Snellman A, Lantero-Rodriguez J, Emeršič A, Vrillon A, Karikari TK, Ashton NJ, et al. N-terminal and mid-region tau fragments as fluid biomarkers in neurological diseases. Brain (London, England : 1878). 2022;145(8):2834-48.
Karjalainen T, Tuisku J, Santavirta S, Kantonen T, Bucci M, Tuominen L, et al. Magia: Robust Automated Image Processing and Kinetic Modeling Toolbox for PET Neuroinformatics. Front Neuroinform. 2020;14:3.
Koikkalainen J, Rhodius-Meester H, Tolonen A, Barkhof F, Tijms B, Lemstra AW, et al. Differential diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases using structural MRI data. Neuroimage Clin. 2016;11:435-49.
Lötjönen J, Wolz R, Koikkalainen J, Julkunen V, Thurfjell L, Lundqvist R, et al. Fast and robust extraction of hippocampus from MR images for diagnostics of Alzheimer's disease. Neuroimage. 2011;56(1):185-96.
Koikkalainen JR, Rhodius-Meester HFM, Frederiksen KS, Bruun M, Hasselbalch SG, Baroni M, et al. Automatically computed rating scales from MRI for patients with cognitive disorders. European Radiology. 2019;29(9):4937-47.
Chandra A, Dervenoulas G, Politis M. Magnetic resonance imaging in Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Neurology. 2019;266(6):1293-302.
Frisoni GB, Fox NC, Jack CR, Scheltens P, Thompson PM. The clinical use of structural MRI in Alzheimer disease. Nature Reviews Neurology. 2010;6(2):67-77.
Veldsman M, Nobis L, Alfaro-Almagro F, Manohar S, Husain M. The human hippocampus and its subfield volumes across age, sex and APOE e4 status. Brain Communications. 2021;3(1):fcaa219-fcaa.
Geroldi C, Pihlajamäki M, Laakso MP, DeCarli C, Beltramello A, Bianchetti A, et al. APOE-epsilon4 is associated with less frontal and more medial temporal lobe atrophy in AD. Neurology. 1999;53(8):1825-32.
Hostage CA, Roy Choudhury K, Doraiswamy PM, Petrella JR. Dissecting the Gene Dose-Effects of the APOE ε4 and ε2 Alleles on Hippocampal Volumes in Aging and Alzheimer’s Disease. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(2):e54483.
Novellino F, López ME, Vaccaro MG, Miguel Y, Delgado ML, Maestu F. Association Between Hippocampus, Thalamus, and Caudate in Mild Cognitive Impairment APOEε4 Carriers: A Structural Covariance MRI Study. Frontiers in neurology. 2019;10:1303-.
Malek-Ahmadi M, Su Y, Ghisays V, Luo J, Devadas V, Chen Y, et al. Plasma NfL is associated with the APOE ε4 allele, brain imaging measurements of neurodegeneration, and lower recall memory scores in cognitively unimpaired late-middle-aged and older adults. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy. 2023;15(1).
Mattsson N, Eriksson O, Lindberg O, Schöll M, Lampinen B, Nilsson M, et al. Effects of APOE ε4 on neuroimaging, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, and cognition in prodromal Alzheimer's disease. Neurobiology of Aging. 2018;71:81-90.
Mielke MM, Syrjanen JA, Blennow K, Zetterberg H, Vemuri P, Skoog I, et al. Plasma and CSF neurofilament light. Neurology. 2019;93(3):e252-e60.
Chong JR, Hilal S, Ashton NJ, Karikari TK, Reilhac A, Vrooman H, et al. Brain atrophy and white matter hyperintensities are independently associated with plasma neurofilament light chain in an Asian cohort of cognitively impaired patients with concomitant cerebral small vessel disease. Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring. 2023;15(1).
Wardlaw JM, Valdés Hernández MC, Muñoz‐Maniega S. What are White Matter Hyperintensities Made of? Journal of the American Heart Association. 2015;4(6):e001140.
Bridel C, Van Wieringen WN, Zetterberg H, Tijms BM, Teunissen CE, Alvarez-Cermeño JC, et al. Diagnostic Value of Cerebrospinal Fluid Neurofilament Light Protein in Neurology. JAMA Neurology. 2019;76(9):1035.
Meeker KL, Butt OH, Gordon BA, Fagan AM, Schindler SE, Morris JC, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid neurofilament light chain is a marker of aging and white matter damage. Neurobiology of disease. 2022;166:105662-.
Jonsson M, Zetterberg H, Van Straaten E, Lind K, Syversen S, Edman Å, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers of white matter lesions - cross-sectional results from the LADIS study. European Journal of Neurology. 2010;17(3):377-82.
Osborn KE, Liu DD, Samuels LR, Moore EE, Cambronero FE, Acosta LMY, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid beta-amyloid(42) and neurofilament light relate to white matter hyperintensities. Neurobiology of Aging. 2018;68:18-25.
Ashton NJ, Leuzy A, Lim YM, Troakes C, Hortobágyi T, Höglund K, et al. Increased plasma neurofilament light chain concentration correlates with severity of post-mortem neurofibrillary tangle pathology and neurodegeneration. Acta Neuropathologica Communications. 2019;7(1).
Walsh P, Sudre CH, Fiford CM, Ryan NS, Lashley T, Frost C, et al. The age-dependent associations of white matter hyperintensities and neurofilament light in early- and late-stage Alzheimer's disease. Neurobiology of Aging. 2021;97:10-7.
Sudre CH, Cardoso MJ, Frost C, Barnes J, Barkhof F, Fox N, et al. APOE ε4 status is associated with white matter hyperintensities volume accumulation rate independent of AD diagnosis. Neurobiology of aging. 2017;53:67-75.
Marks JD, Syrjanen JA, Graff-Radford J, Petersen RC, Machulda MM, Campbell MR, et al. Comparison of plasma neurofilament light and total tau as neurodegeneration markers: associations with cognitive and neuroimaging outcomes. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy. 2021;13(1).
Zetterberg H, Skillbäck T, Mattsson N, Trojanowski JQ, Portelius E, Shaw LM, et al. Association of Cerebrospinal Fluid Neurofilament Light Concentration With Alzheimer Disease Progression. JAMA Neurology. 2016;73(1):60.
Baek MS, Cho H, Lee HS, Lee JH, Ryu YH, Lyoo CH. Effect of APOE ε4 genotype on amyloid-β and tau accumulation in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy. 2020;12(1).
Therriault J, Benedet AL, Pascoal TA, Mathotaarachchi S, Chamoun M, Savard M, et al. Association of Apolipoprotein E ε4 With Medial Temporal Tau Independent of Amyloid-β. JAMA Neurology. 2020;77(4):470.
La Joie R, Visani AV, Lesman-Segev OH, Baker SL, Edwards L, Iaccarino L, et al. Association of APOE4 and Clinical Variability in Alzheimer Disease With the Pattern of Tau- and Amyloid-PET. Neurology. 2021;96(5):E650-E61.
Ballatore C, Lee VM-Y, Trojanowski JQ. Tau-mediated neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease and related disorders. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2007;8(9):663-72.
Iqbal K, Liu F, Gong C-X, Alonso ADC, Grundke-Iqbal I. Mechanisms of tau-induced neurodegeneration. Acta Neuropathologica. 2009;118(1):53-69.
Gendron TF, Petrucelli L. The role of tau in neurodegeneration. Molecular Neurodegeneration. 2009;4(1):13.
Blennow K, Hampel H, Weiner M, Zetterberg H. Cerebrospinal fluid and plasma biomarkers in Alzheimer disease. Nature Reviews Neurology. 2010;6(3):131-44.
Dugger BN, Whiteside CM, Maarouf CL, Walker DG, Beach TG, Sue LI, et al. The Presence of Select Tau Species in Human Peripheral Tissues and Their Relation to Alzheimer’s Disease. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease. 2016;51(2):345-56.
Fischer I, Baas PW. Resurrecting the Mysteries of Big Tau. Trends in neurosciences (Regular ed). 2020;43(7):493-504.
Hol EM, Pekny M. Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and the astrocyte intermediate filament system in diseases of the central nervous system. Current opinion in cell biology. 2015;32:121-30.
Benedet AL, Milà-Alomà M, Vrillon A, Ashton NJ, Pascoal TA, Lussier F, et al. Differences Between Plasma and Cerebrospinal Fluid Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein Levels Across the Alzheimer Disease Continuum. JAMA Neurology. 2021;78(12):1471.
De Bastiani MA, Bellaver B, Brum WS, Souza DG, Ferreira PCL, Rocha AS, et al. Hippocampal GFAP-positive astrocyte responses to amyloid and tau pathologies. Brain, behavior, and immunity. 2023;110:175-84.
Montoliu-Gaya L, Alcolea D, Ashton NJ, Pegueroles J, Levin J, Bosch B, et al. Plasma and cerebrospinal fluid glial fibrillary acidic protein levels in adults with Down syndrome: a longitudinal cohort study. EBioMedicine. 2023;90:104547-.
O'Connor A, Abel E, Benedet AL, Poole T, Ashton N, Weston PSJ, et al. Plasma GFAP in presymptomatic and symptomatic familial Alzheimer’s disease: a longitudinal cohort study. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. 2023;94(1):90-2.
Batiuk MY, Martirosyan A, Wahis J, de Vin F, Marneffe C, Kusserow C, et al. Identification of region-specific astrocyte subtypes at single cell resolution. Nature communications. 2020;11(1):1220-.
Clarke LE, Liddelow SA, Chakraborty C, Münch AE, Heiman M, Barres BA. Normal aging induces A1-like astrocyte reactivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2018;115(8):E1896-E905.

Competing interest reported. HZ has served at scientific advisory boards and/or as a consultant for Abbvie, Acumen, Alector, Alzinova, ALZPath, Annexon, Apellis, Artery Therapeutics, AZTherapies, CogRx, Denali, Eisai, Nervgen, Novo Nordisk, Optoceutics, Passage Bio, Pinteon Therapeutics, Prothena, Red Abbey Labs, reMYND, Roche, Samumed, Siemens Healthineers, Triplet Therapeutics, and Wave, has given lectures in symposia sponsored by Cellectricon, Fujirebio, Alzecure, Biogen, and Roche, and is a co-founder of Brain Biomarker Solutions in Gothenburg AB (BBS), which is a part of the GU Ventures Incubator Program (outside submitted work). KB has served as a consultant and at advisory boards for Acumen, ALZPath, BioArctic, Biogen, Eisai, Lilly, Moleac Pte. Ltd, Novartis, Ono Pharma, Prothena, Roche Diagnostics, and Siemens Healthineers; has served at data monitoring committees for Julius Clinical and Novartis; has given lectures, produced educational materials and participated in educational programs for AC Immune, Biogen, Celdara Medical, Eisai and Roche Diagnostics; and is a co-founder of Brain Biomarker Solutions in Gothenburg AB (BBS), which is a part of the GU Ventures Incubator Program, outside the work presented in this paper.

ASICbloodvsmritables.docx

Blood biomarkers of neurodegeneration associate differently with amyloid deposition, medial temporal atrophy, and cerebrovascular changes in APOE ε4-enriched cognitively unimpaired elderly

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Materials and methods

Statistical analysis

Results

Participant demographics

Blood biomarkers across APOE groups

Structural MRI findings across APOE groups

Correlations between imaging and blood biomarkers

Effect of Aβ, medial temporal atrophy, cerebrovascular pathology on blood biomarker concentrations

Discussion

Conclusions

Abbreviations

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent for publication

Availability of data and materials

Competing interests

Authors' contributions

Acknowledgements

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1