Disclosure of preclinical Alzheimer's disease biomarker results in research and clinical settings: Why, how, and what we still need to know

Amyloid PET disclosure in subjective cognitive decline: Patient experiences over time

INTRODUCTION

We disclosed amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) results in individuals with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and studied patient experiences and outcomes over a 6-month period.

METHODS

Fifty-seven participants from the Subjective Cognitive Impairment Cohort (SCIENCe) (66 ± 8 years, 21 [37%] F, Mini-Mental State Examination 29 ± 1, 15 [26%] amyloid positive [A+]) completed questionnaires 1 week prior (T0), 1 day after (T1), and 6 months after amyloid PET disclosure (T2). Questionnaires addressed patient-reported experiences and outcomes.

RESULTS

Independent of amyloid status, participants were satisfied with the consultation (scale 1-10; 7.9 ± 1.7) and information provided (scale 1-4; T1: 3.3 ± 0.9, T2: 3.2 ± 0.8). After 6 months, A+ participants reported more information needs (45% vs. 12%, p = 0.02). Independent of amyloid status, decision regret (scale 1-5; A+: 1.5 ± 0.9, A-: 1.4 ± 0.6, p = 0.53) and negative emotions (negative affect, uncertainty, anxiety) were low (all p > 0.15 and Pinteraction > 0.60).

DISCUSSION

Participants with SCD valued amyloid PET disclosure positively, regardless of amyloid status. The need for information after 6 months, which was stronger in A+ individuals, underscores the importance of follow-up.

HIGHLIGHTS

Participants with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) positively valued amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) disclosure. Participants with SCD experienced low levels of decision regret. We did not observe an increase in negative emotions. After 6 months, amyloid-positive individuals wanted more information.

fNIRS as a biomarker for individuals with subjective memory complaints and MCI

INTRODUCTION

Identifying individuals at risk of developing dementia is crucial for early intervention. Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and subjective memory complaints (SMCs) are considered its preceding stages. This study aimed to assess the utility of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in identifying individuals with MCI and SMC.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-one participants were categorized into normal cognition (NC); amnestic MCI (aMCI); non-amnestic MCI (naMCI); and mild, moderate, and severe SMC groups. Task-related prefrontal hemodynamics were measured using fNIRS during a visual memory span task.

RESULTS

Results showed significantly lower oxyhemoglobin (HbO) levels in aMCI, but not in naMCI, compared to the NC. In addition, severe SMC had lower HbO levels than the NC, mild, and moderate SMC. Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated 69.23% and 69.70% accuracy in differentiating aMCI and severe SMC from NC, respectively.

DISCUSSION

FNIRS may serve as a potential non-invasive biomarker for early detection of dementia.

HIGHLIGHTS

Only amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), but not non-amnestic MCI, showed lower oxyhemoglobin (HbO) than normal individuals. Reduced HbO was observed in those with severe subjective memory complaints (SMCs) compared to normal cognition (NC), mild, and moderate SMCs. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy measures were associated with performance in memory assessments. Prefrontal hemodynamics could distinguish aMCI and severe SMC from NC.

Disclosing the Risk Associated with Isolated REM Behavior Disorder: The Sleep Experts' Perspective

BACKGROUND

Isolated rapid-eye-movement sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) is associated with a high risk for phenoconversion to a neurodegenerative disorder, but the optimal approach for disclosure of this risk to patients is still debated.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to explore views and experiences of iRBD experts regarding risk disclosure.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews with sleep experts caring for patients with iRBD were analyzed through a conventional content analysis approach.

RESULTS

We interviewed 22 iRBD experts (eight female, average age of 51.8 years) from 18 Italian sleep centers; 21/22 regularly disclosed the risks associated with iRBD, usually after the video-polysomnography, and 8/22 regularly mentioned phenoconversion rates. Content analysis allowed us to identify three main themes. First, sleep experts reported several points in favor of risk disclosure, especially related to the principle of beneficence, but some highlighted the need for specific learning on the topic. Second, experts favored a patient-tailored disclosure that should not upset the patient unnecessarily, since phenoconversion is uncertain. Third, risk disclosure was seen by participants as a relational task that should be carried out in person in the context of a trusting patient-physician relationship, while they had contrasting views regarding patients' previous knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Sleep experts generally preferred a tailored and reassuring approach to risk disclosure within a framework of relational autonomy. The results of this study indicate the need for specific education, training, and recommendations concerning risk disclosure that should also include patients' and families' preferences.

Communicating Alzheimer's biomarker results to cognitively unimpaired research participants: Satisfaction, utility, and impact on research attitudes

Introduction

Recruitment and retention pose a significant challenge to Alzheimer's disease (AD) research. Returning AD biomarker results to participants has been proposed as a means to improve recruitment and retention. We present findings related to participant satisfaction, utility, and impact on research attitudes from the amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) disclosure sub-study within the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention (WRAP).

Methods

Ninety-nine cognitively unimpaired WRAP participants learned their amyloid PET results (mean age ± SD = 72.0 ± 4.8). Measures of reasons for wanting to learn results, study comprehension, result utility, visit satisfaction, research attitudes, and future study enrollment willingness were collected. Between-group, chi-squared analysis was conducted to determine differences by result type (elevated vs. not elevated amyloid PET result) in study comprehension, result utility, and visit satisfaction. Linear mixed-effects modeling was used to evaluate changes in research attitudes and enrollment willingness as a function of time, amyloid result type (elevated/not elevated), and their interaction.

Results

The reasons most frequently endorsed for wanting to learn amyloid PET result was a "desire to contribute to research on Alzheimer's disease dementia" and "to inform preventative measures [one] might take (e.g., change diet, exercise, or other lifestyle changes)." Overall, participants reported understanding the results and found learning them useful. Satisfaction with the study visits was overwhelmingly high, with over 80% agreeing with visit usefulness and their satisfaction. Few differences were found between participants who learned an elevated and not elevated result. Over the course of the study, participants who learned an elevated amyloid PET result reported higher willingness to enroll in drug trials (beta: 0.12, p = 0.01) and lifestyle interventions (beta: 0.10, p = 0.02) compared to participants who learned a not elevated result.

Discussion

Formal incorporation of disclosure practices may encourage participant recruitment and retention within AD research.

Highlights

Participants wanted to learn their amyloid results to contribute to research.Satisfaction with disclosure and post-disclosure visits was high overall.Returning AD biomarkers can increase willingness to participate in research.

Alzheimer's in the modern age: Ethical challenges in the use of digital monitoring to identify cognitive changes

Pushes toward earlier detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related cognitive changes are creating interest in leveraging technologies, like cellphones, that are already widespread and well-equipped for data collection to facilitate digital monitoring for AD. Studies are ongoing to identify and validate potential "digital biomarkers" that might indicate someone has or is at risk of developing AD dementia. Digital biomarkers for AD have potential as a tool in aiding more timely diagnosis, though more robust research is needed to support their validity and utility. While there are grounds for optimism, leveraging digital monitoring and informatics for cognitive changes also poses ethical challenges, related to topics such as algorithmic bias, consent, and data privacy and security. As we confront the modern era of Alzheimer's disease, individuals, companies, regulators and policymakers alike must prepare for a future in which our day-to-day interactions with technology in our daily life may identify AD-related cognitive changes.

The Room Where It Happens: Clinician Reflections on Returning Preclinical Alzheimer's Biomarker Results to Research Participants

Disclosing Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers to research participants is a growing practice. Here, we aim to synthesize the experiences of clinicians leading preclinical AD biomarker disclosure. Semi-structured interviews were conducted individually with each of the four clinicians conducting biomarker disclosure as a part of a longitudinal, observational AD cohort study. Study clinicians emphasized the importance of participant education, having adequate time available for the disclosure visit, and forms to facilitate disclosure. To train and support future clinicians conducting AD biomarker disclosure, our study clinicians highlighted providing information about AD and biomarkers, shadowing a disclosure visit, having team debriefing sessions, and collating a frequently asked questions document. To date, this is the first characterization of clinician reflections on disclosing AD biomarker result to cognitively unimpaired research participants. As more clinicians in research or clinical settings seek to disclose AD biomarker results, best practices for training clinicians to lead disclosure are necessary.

A Pragmatic, Investigator-Driven Process for Disclosure of Amyloid PET Scan Results to ADNI-4 Research Participants

BACKGROUND

Prior studies of Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarker disclosure have answered important questions about individuals' safety after learning and comprehending their amyloid PET results; however, these studies have typically employed highly structured disclosure protocols and focused on the psychological impact of disclosure (e.g., anxiety, depression, and suicidality) in homogeneous populations. More work is needed to develop flexible disclosure protocols and study outcomes in ethnoculturally representative samples.

METHODS

The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) is formally incorporating amyloid PET disclosure into the newest protocol (ADNI-4). Participants across the cognitive spectrum who wish to know their amyloid PET results may learn them. The pragmatic disclosure process spans four timepoints: (1) a pre-disclosure visit, (2) the PET scan and its read, (3) a disclosure visit, and (4) a post-disclosure check-in. This process applies to all participants, with slight modifications to account for their cognitive status. In designing this process, special emphasis was placed on utilizing investigator discretion. Participant measures include perceived risk of dementia, purpose in life, and disclosure satisfaction. Investigator assessment of the disclosure visit (e.g., challenges encountered, topics discussed, etc.) is also included.

RESULTS

Data collection is ongoing. Results will allow for more robust characterization of the impact of learning amyloid PET results on individuals and describe the perspectives of investigators.

CONCLUSION

The pragmatic design of the disclosure process in ADNI-4 coupled with the novel participant and investigator data will inform future disclosure practices. This is especially important as disclosure of biomarker results expands in research and care.

Louis EK, Noyce AJ. Ethical Considerations for Identifying Individuals in the Prodromal/Early Phase of Parkinson's Disease: A Narrative Review

The ability to identify individuals in the prodromal phase of Parkinson's disease has improved in recent years, raising the question of whether and how those affected should be informed about the risk of future disease. Several studies investigated prognostic counselling for individuals with isolated REM sleep behavior disorder and have shown that most patients want to receive information about prognosis, but autonomy and individual preferences must be respected. However, there are still many unanswered questions about risk disclosure or early diagnosis of PD, including the impact on personal circumstances, cultural preferences and specific challenges associated with different profiles of prodromal symptoms, genetic testing or biomarker assessments. This narrative review aims to summarize the current literature on prognostic counselling and risk disclosure in PD, as well as highlight future perspectives that may emerge with the development of new biomarkers and their anticipated impact on the definition of PD.

The importance of the dyad: Participant perspectives on sharing biomarker results in Alzheimer's disease research

BACKGROUND

In the asymptomatic "preclinical" phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD), abnormal biomarkers indicate risk for developing cognitive impairment. Biomarker information is increasingly being disclosed to participants in research settings, and biomarker testing and results disclosure will be implemented in clinical settings in the future. Biomarker disclosure has potential psychosocial benefits and harms, impacting affected individuals and their support person(s). Limited data are available about with whom research participants share their results, information that will be necessary to develop disclosure protocols and post-disclosure resources. Additionally, existing research has been conducted in largely White cohorts, limiting applicability to future clinical populations.

METHODS

We enrolled a diverse cohort of 329 adults (184 non-Hispanic White and 145 Black/African American individuals) who previously participated in AD research. After reviewing a vignette describing a hypothetical biomarker research study, participants indicated their anticipated willingness to share biomarker results with loved ones, and what reactions they anticipated from others. Using mixed-methods analysis, we identified responses related to willingness to share results.

RESULTS

A majority (78.7%) were willing to share their results with support persons. Many (59.6%) felt it would not be difficult to share, and most (90.6%) believed their loved ones would be supportive. The most common reasons for sharing were to prepare for possible future AD (41.0% of respondents), while the most common reason for not sharing was to avoid worrying loved ones (4.8% of respondents). A total of 7.3% of respondents related reasons regarding being unsure about sharing.

DISCUSSION

Participants' interest in sharing results supports integrating support persons into AD biomarker research, and may help maximize potential benefits for participants. Communicating with this "dyad" of research participant and support person(s) may improve involvement in research, and help prepare for implementation of clinical biomarker testing by clarifying communication preferences and the influence of support persons on psychosocial outcomes.

Feasibility of virtual Alzheimer's biomarker disclosure: Findings from an observational cohort

Introduction

Increased availability of Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarker tests provides older adults with opportunities to seek out and learn results. We evaluated the feasibility of virtually returning AD biomarker results.

Methods

Trained study clinicians disclosed amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) results and provided dementia risk-reduction counseling via televideo to cognitively unimpaired participants already enrolled in AD research (n = 99; mean age ± SD: 72.0 ± 4.8; 67% women; 95% White; 28% amyloid elevated).

Results

Our study demonstrated acceptable levels of retention (93%), compliance (98%), adherence (98%), clinician competence (97%), education comprehension (quiz scores 14/15), and virtual visit functionality (rating 9.4/10). Depression, anxiety, and suicidality remained low and did not differ by amyloid result.

Discussion

Virtual return of amyloid PET results to cognitively unimpaired research participants is feasible and does not result in increased psychological symptoms. Technological barriers for some participants highlight the need for flexibility. These findings support the use of televideo in AD biomarker disclosure, although our study sample and design have important limitations for generalizability.

Testing for Alzheimer Disease Biomarkers and Disclosing Results Across the Disease Continuum

Three pathologic processes are characteristic of Alzheimer disease (AD): β-amyloid, hyperphosphorylated tau, and neurodegeneration. Our understanding of AD is undergoing a transformation due to our ability to measure biomarkers of these processes across different stages of cognitive impairment. There is growing interest in using AD biomarker tests in care and research and, with this, a growing need for guidance on how to return these sensitive results to patients and participants. Here, we propose a 5-step approach informed by clinical and research experience designing and implementing AD biomarker disclosure processes, extant evidence describing how individuals react to AD biomarker information, ethics, law, and the literature on breaking bad news. The clinician should (1) determine the appropriateness of AD biomarker testing and return of results for the particular patient or research participant. If testing is appropriate, the next steps are to (2) provide pretest education and seek consent for testing from the individual and their support person, (3) administer testing, (4) return the results to the individual and their support person, and (5) follow-up to promote the recipient's well-being.

Barriers and facilitators to participating in Alzheimer's disease biomarker research in black and white older adults

Introduction

The study examined Black and White prospective participants' views of barriers to and facilitators of participation in Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarker research.

Methods

In a mixed-methods study, 399 community-dwelling Black and White older adults (age ≥55) who had never participated in AD research completed a survey about their perceptions of AD biomarker research. Individuals from lower socioeconomic and education backgrounds and Black men were over-sampled to address perspectives of traditionally under-represented groups. A subset of participants (n = 29) completed qualitative interviews.

Results

Most participants expressed interest in biomarker research (overall 69%). However, Black participants were comparatively more hesitant than White participants (28.9% vs 15.1%), were more concerned about study risks (28.9% vs 15.1%), and perceived multiple barriers to participating in brain scans. These results persisted even after adjusting for trust and perceived knowledge of AD. Information was a primary barrier (when absent) and incentive (when provided) for AD biomarker research participation. Black older adults desired more information about AD (eg, risk, prevention), general research processes, and specific biomarker procedures. They also desired return of results to make informed decisions about their health, research-sponsored community awareness events, and for researchers to mitigate the burden placed on participants in research (eg, transportation, basic needs).

Conclusion

Our findings increase representativeness in the literature by focusing on individuals with no history of AD research experience and those from traditionally underrepresented groups in research. Results suggest that the research community needs to improve information sharing and raising awareness, increase their presence in the communities of underrepresented groups, reduce incidental costs, and provide valuable personal health information to participants to increase interest. Specific recommendations for improving recruitment are addressed. Future studies will assess the implementation of evidence-based, socioculturally sensitive recruitment strategies to increase enrollment of Black older adults into AD biomarker studies.HIGHLIGHTS: Individuals from under-represented groups are interested in Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarker research.After adjusting for trust and AD knowledge, Black participants were still more hesitant.Information is a barrier (when absent) to and incentive (when given) for biomarker studies.Reducing burden (e.g., transportation) is essential for recruiting Black older adults.

The Early Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease: A Patient-Centred Conversation with the Care Team

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder which accounts for 60-80% of dementia cases, affecting approximately 10 million people in Europe. Neuroimaging techniques and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers used in combination with cognitive assessment tools open the door to early diagnosis of AD. However, these tools present some challenges that need to be overcome, such as low sensitivity or specificity, high cost, limited availability or invasiveness. Thus, low-cost and non-invasive alternatives, such as plasma biomarkers, have the potential to drive changes in AD screening and diagnosis. In addition to the technical aspects, organisational challenges as well as ethical concerns need to be addressed. In many countries, there is an insufficient number of specialists to recognise, evaluate and diagnose dementia and the waiting times to see a specialist are long. Given that there is currently no cure for AD, it is important to consider the potential psychological impact of an early diagnosis. In addition, counselling before biomarker sampling and during diagnosis disclosure is vital to guarantee that the patients have all the information necessary and their queries are addressed in a sensitive manner. Here, we illustrate (using a clinical vignette) current challenges of diagnosis and discuss some of the benefits and challenges of early diagnosis in AD including the value of biomarkers in combination with clinical evaluation. Lastly, some guidelines for disclosing early diagnosis of AD are provided based on our experiences.

Biomarkers and Risk Assessment of Alzheimer's Disease in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Dementia is a chronic syndrome which is common among the elderly and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality for patients and their caregivers. Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common form of clinical dementia, is biologically characterized by the deposition of amyloid-β plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in the brain. The onset of AD begins decades before manifestation of symptoms and clinical diagnosis, underlining the need to shift from clinical diagnosis of AD to a more objective diagnosis using biomarkers. Having performed a literature search of original articles and reviews on PubMed and Google Scholar, we present this review detailing the existing biomarkers and risk assessment tools for AD. The prevalence of dementia in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is predicted to increase over the next couple of years. Thus, we aimed to identify potential biomarkers that may be appropriate for use in LMICs, considering the following factors: sensitivity, specificity, invasiveness, and affordability of the biomarkers. We also explored risk assessment tools and the potential use of artificial intelligence/machine learning solutions for diagnosing, assessing risks, and monitoring the progression of AD in low-resource settings. Routine use of AD biomarkers has yet to gain sufficient ground in clinical settings. Therefore, clinical diagnosis of AD will remain the mainstay in LMICs for the foreseeable future. Efforts should be made towards the development of low-cost, easily administered risk assessment tools to identify individuals who are at risk of AD in the population. We recommend that stakeholders invest in education, research and development targeted towards effective risk assessment and management.

Understanding Online Registry Facilitators and Barriers Experienced by Black Brain Health Registry Participants: The Community Engaged Digital Alzheimer's Research (CEDAR) Study

BACKGROUND

Failure of Alzheimer's disease and related diseases (ADRD) research studies to include and engage Black participants is a major issue, which limits the impact and generalizability of research findings. Little is known about participation of Black adults in online ADRD-related research registries.

OBJECTIVES

As part of the Community Engaged Digital Alzheimer's Research (CEDAR) Study, this study aims to increase our understanding of facilitators and barriers of Black adults to participating in ADRD-related online registries, as well as to understand their preferences for communication channels.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, MEASUREMENTS

We invited all Black participants enrolled in the Brain Health Registry (BHR) to complete a cross-sectional online survey. The survey consisted of rating scales and open-text questions asking about their attitudes towards brain health research, reasons for joining and continuing to participate in BHR, difficulties with participating, and preferences for modes of contact and website usage.

RESULTS

Of all invited Black BHR participants (N=3,636), 198 (5.5%) completed the survey. The mean age was 58.4 (SD=11.3), mean years of education were 16.3 (SD=2.4), and 85.5% identified as female. Reported facilitators for joining and continuing to participate in BHR were personal interest (e.g., learning more about own brain health) and altruism (e.g., helping research). Among additional registry features which could encourage return, receiving feedback or scores about BHR tasks was rated the highest. Of those who found BHR participation difficult (21%), the most frequent reason was time burden. The most preferred way of receiving study information was via email. Participants reported that the websites that they used the most were YouTube and Facebook.

DISCUSSION

The results of our study can inform the development of culturally-responsive registry features and engagement efforts to improve inclusion and participation of Black adults in online ADRD research. Providing participants with feedback about their registry performance and reducing the number of registry tasks are among the recommended strategies.

Informing Disclosure: Efficacy of a Brief Educational Intervention on Research Participants' Knowledge about Alzheimer's Disease Biomarkers

Recommendations for communicating Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers include pre-disclosure participant education and counseling, to allow individuals to make an informed decision. In a cohort of largely non-Hispanic White, cognitively unimpaired older adults from the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention, we conducted a structured amyloid PET disclosure process that included knowledge assessment and education. Baseline participant knowledge about AD biomarkers and research was high, but information needs existed around dementia causes, early AD symptoms, genetic information, and psychosocial consequences of disclosure. Knowledge scores increased after education, highlighting the potential of brief educational interventions to improve informed decision-making about biomarker disclosure.

Ethical Frameworks for Disclosure of Alzheimer Disease Biomarkers to Research Participants: Conflicting Norms and a Nuanced Policy

More and more frequently, clinical trials for Alzheimer disease (AD) are targeting cognitively unimpaired individuals who are at increased risk of developing the disease. It is not always clear whether AD biomarker information should be disclosed to research participants: on the one hand, research participants may be interested in learning this information because of its perceived utility, but on the other hand, learning this information may be harmful, as there are very few effective preventive or therapeutic options available for AD. In this article, we bring together three separate sets of ethical guidance literature: on the return of individual research results, on an individual's right to access personal data, and on transparent enrollment into clinical trials. Based on these literatures, we suggest policies for the disclosure of AD biomarker test results in longitudinal observational cohort studies, clinical trials, and hybrid research projects, such as the European Prevention of Alzheimer's Dementia (EPAD) project, in which we served as an ethics team. We also present and critically discuss recommendations for disclosure of AD biomarkers in practice. We underscore that, as long as the clinical validity of AD biomarkers remains limited, there are good reasons to avoid actively disclosing them to cognitively unimpaired research participants.

Moving beyond disclosure: Stages of care in preclinical Alzheimer's disease biomarker testing

Alzheimer's disease (AD) begins with an asymptomatic "preclinical" phase, in which abnormal biomarkers indicate risk for developing cognitive impairment. Biomarker information is increasingly being disclosed in research settings, and is moving toward clinical settings with the development of cheaper and non-invasive testing. Limited research has focused on the safety and psychological effects of disclosing biomarker results to cognitively unimpaired adults. However, less is known about how to ensure equitable access and robust counseling for decision-making before testing, and how to effectively provide long-term follow-up and risk management after testing. Using the framework of Huntington's disease, which is based on extensive experience with disclosing and managing risk for a progressive neurodegenerative condition, this article proposes a conceptual model of pre-disclosure, disclosure, and post-disclosure phases for AD biomarker testing. Addressing research questions in each phase will facilitate the transition of biomarker testing into clinical practice.

Initial Data and a Clinical Diagnosis Transition for the Aiginition Longitudinal Biomarker Investigation of Neurodegeneration (ALBION) Study

Background and Objectives: This article presents data from the ongoing Aiginition Longitudinal Biomarker Investigation of Neurodegeneration study (ALBION) regarding baseline clinical characterizations and CSF biomarker profiles, as well as preliminary longitudinal data on clinical progression. Materials and Methods: As of March 2022, 138 participants who either were cognitively normal (CN, n = 99) or had a diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI, n = 39) had been recruited at the specialist cognitive disorders outpatient clinic at Aiginition Hospital. Clinical characteristics at baseline were provided. These patients were followed annually to determine progression from CN to MCI or even dementia. CSF biomarker data (amyloid β1-42, phosphorylated tau at threonine 181, and total tau) collected using automated Elecsys® assays (Roche Diagnostics) were available for 74 patients. These patients were further sorted based on the AT(N) classification model, as determined by CSF Aβ42 (A), CSF pTau (T), and CSF tTau (N). Results: Of the 49 CN patients with CSF biomarker data, 21 (43%) were classified as exhibiting “Alzheimer’s pathologic change” (A+Τ− (Ν)−) and 6 (12%) as having “Alzheimer’s disease” (A+T−(N)+, A+T+(N)−, or A+T+(N)+). Of the 25 MCI patients, 8 (32%) displayed “Alzheimer’s pathologic change”, and 6 (24%) had “Alzheimer’s disease”. A total of 66 individuals had a mean follow-up of 2.1 years (SD = 0.9, min = 0.8, max = 3.9), and 15 of those individuals (22%) showed a clinical progression (defined as a worsening clinical classification, i.e., from CN to MCI or dementia or from MCI to dementia). Overall, participants with the “AD continuum” AT(N) biomarker profile (i.e., A+T−(N)−, A+T−(N)+, A+T+(N)−, and A+T+(N)+) were more likely to clinically progress (p = 0.04). Conclusions: A CSF “AD continuum” AT(N) biomarker profile is associated with an increased risk of future clinical decline in CN or MCI subjects.

Implications of preclinical Alzheimer's disease biomarker disclosure for US policy and society

Disclosure of Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers to cognitively unimpaired adults are currently conducted only in research settings. Yet, US Food and Drug Administration approval of a disease-modifying treatment for symptomatic individuals, improved understanding of the "preclinical" phase of disease, and advancements toward more accessible biomarker tests suggest such disclosure will increase in frequency, eventually becoming routine in clinical practice. The changing landscape in AD research to focus on biomarkers has generated debate on the validity and clinical utility of disclosure to cognitively unimpaired adults. This article explores the broader social implications of more widespread AD biomarker disclosure-that is, of individuals learning their risk for developing dementia caused by AD. We identify 10 challenges and offer preliminary solutions. As the field continues to evolve, it is essential to anticipate and address these broader ethical, legal, and social implications of disclosure.

Considerations regarding a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease before dementia: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The NIA-AA research framework proposes a purely biological definition of Alzheimer's disease (AD). This implies that AD can be diagnosed based on biomarker abnormalities, irrespective of clinical manifestation. While this brings opportunities, it also raises challenges. We aimed to provide an overview of considerations regarding the disclosure of AD pathology before the onset of dementia.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection (on 10 December 2020) for references on conveying AD biomarker results to individuals without dementia. Our query combined variations on the terms Alzheimer's disease, disclosure, or diagnosis, preclinical or prodromal, and biomarkers. Two reviewers independently screened the resulting 6860 titles and abstracts for eligibility and examined 162 full-text records for relevance. We included theoretical articles in English, on communicating amyloid and/or tau results to individuals with mild cognitive impairment, subjective cognitive decline, or normal cognition. MAXQDA-software was used for inductive data analysis.

RESULTS

We included 27 publications. From these, we extracted 26 unique considerations, which we grouped according to their primary relevance to a clinical, personal, or societal context. Clinical considerations included (lack of) validity, utility, and disclosure protocols. Personal considerations covered psychological and behavioral implications, as well as the right to (not) know. Finally, societal considerations comprised the risk of misconception, stigmatization, and discrimination. Overall, views were heterogeneous and often contradictory, with emphasis on harmful effects.

CONCLUSIONS

We found 26 diverse and opposing considerations, related to a clinical, personal, or societal context, which are relevant to diagnosing AD before dementia. The theoretical literature tended to focus on adverse impact and rely on common morality, while the motivation for and implications of biomarker testing are deeply personal. Our findings provide a starting point for clinicians to discuss biomarker-based diagnosis with their patients, which will become even more relevant in light of the conditional approval of a first disease-modifying drug for AD.

Blood Biomarkers from Research Use to Clinical Practice: What Must Be Done? A Report from the EU/US CTAD Task Force

Timely and accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in clinical practice remains challenging. PET and CSF biomarkers are the most widely used biomarkers to aid diagnosis in clinical research but present limitations for clinical practice (i.e., cost, accessibility). Emerging blood-based markers have the potential to be accurate, cost-effective, and easily accessible for widespread clinical use, and could facilitate timely diagnosis. The EU/US CTAD Task Force met in May 2022 in a virtual meeting to discuss pathways to implementation of blood-based markers in clinical practice. Specifically, the CTAD Task Force assessed: the state-of-art for blood-based markers, the current use of blood-based markers in clinical trials, the potential use of blood-based markers in clinical practice, the current challenges with blood-based markers, and the next steps needed for broader adoption in clinical practice.

Family members' perspectives on learning cognitively unimpaired older adults' amyloid-β PET scan results

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Disclosure of Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk information to cognitively unimpaired older adults may become more common if preclinical AD is shown to be identifiable and amenable to treatment. Little, however, is known about how families will react to this information.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Semi-structured telephonic interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Seventy study partners (mean age = 68 [±11]; 50% female; 70% spouses/significant others; 18% children, siblings; 12% friends) of cognitively unimpaired adults who learned a personalized AD dementia risk estimate and an amyloid-β PET scan result through their participation in preclinical AD research.

MEASUREMENT

Interviewees were asked about their desire for information regarding their family member's AD dementia risk, baseline expectations of risk, understanding of amyloid-β PET scan results, and the impact of AD dementia risk information on emotions, health behaviors, and future plans, as well as on perceptions of their family member's or friend's memory.

RESULTS

Interviewees generally understood the AD dementia risk information (83%) and considered it valuable (75%). Risk information perceived as favorable elicited feelings of happiness and relief; unfavorable information elicited disappointment, as well as increased awareness of the participants' memory and monitoring for incipient changes in cognition. While noting that AD dementia risk information was not medically actionable at this time due to the lack of disease-modifying therapies, some interviewees described changes to their family members' and their own health behaviors and future plans.

CONCLUSION

Guidelines for the disclosure of AD dementia risk estimates and biomarker results to cognitively unimpaired adults should account for the needs and interests of individuals and their family members, who may step into a pre-caregiver role.