Blood Tests for Alzheimer's Disease: Increasing Efforts to Expand and Diversify Research Participation Is Critical for Widespread Validation and Acceptance

Baseline levels and longitudinal changes in plasma Aβ42/40 among Black and white individuals

Blood-based biomarkers of Alzheimer disease (AD) may facilitate testing of historically under-represented groups. The Study of Race to Understand Alzheimer Biomarkers (SORTOUT-AB) is a multi-center longitudinal study to compare AD biomarkers in participants who identify their race as either Black or white. Plasma samples from 324 Black and 1,547 white participants underwent analysis with C2N Diagnostics' PrecivityAD test for Aβ42 and Aβ40. Compared to white individuals, Black individuals had higher average plasma Aβ42/40 levels at baseline, consistent with a lower average level of amyloid pathology. Interestingly, this difference resulted from lower average levels of plasma Aβ40 in Black participants. Despite the differences, Black and white individuals had similar longitudinal rates of change in Aβ42/40, consistent with a similar rate of amyloid accumulation. Our results agree with multiple recent studies demonstrating a lower prevalence of amyloid pathology in Black individuals, and additionally suggest that amyloid accumulates consistently across both groups.

Acceptable performance of blood biomarker tests of amyloid pathology - recommendations from the Global CEO Initiative on Alzheimer's Disease

Anti-amyloid treatments for early symptomatic Alzheimer disease have recently become clinically available in some countries, which has greatly increased the need for biomarker confirmation of amyloid pathology. Blood biomarker (BBM) tests for amyloid pathology are more acceptable, accessible and scalable than amyloid PET or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tests, but have highly variable levels of performance. The Global CEO Initiative on Alzheimer's Disease convened a BBM Workgroup to consider the minimum acceptable performance of BBM tests for clinical use. Amyloid PET status was identified as the reference standard. For use as a triaging test before subsequent confirmatory tests such as amyloid PET or CSF tests, the BBM Workgroup recommends that a BBM test has a sensitivity of ≥90% with a specificity of ≥85% in primary care and ≥75-85% in secondary care depending on the availability of follow-up testing. For use as a confirmatory test without follow-up tests, a BBM test should have performance equivalent to that of CSF tests - a sensitivity and specificity of ~90%. Importantly, the predictive values of all biomarker tests vary according to the pre-test probability of amyloid pathology and must be interpreted in the complete clinical context. Use of BBM tests that meet these performance standards could enable more people to receive an accurate and timely Alzheimer disease diagnosis and potentially benefit from new treatments.

Neuropsychological Assessment for Early Detection and Diagnosis of Dementia: Current Knowledge and New Insights

Dementia remains an underdiagnosed syndrome, and there is a need to improve the early detection of cognitive decline. This narrative review examines the role of neuropsychological assessment in the characterization of cognitive changes associated with dementia syndrome at different states. The first section describes the early indicators of cognitive decline and the major barriers to their identification. Further, the optimal cognitive screening conditions and the most widely accepted tests are described. The second section analyzes the main differences in cognitive performance between Alzheimer's disease and other subtypes of dementia. Finally, the current challenges of neuropsychological assessment in aging/dementia and future approaches are discussed. Essentially, we find that current research is beginning to uncover early cognitive changes that precede dementia, while continuing to improve and refine the differential diagnosis of neurodegenerative disorders that cause dementia. However, neuropsychology faces several barriers, including the cultural diversity of the populations, a limited implementation in public health systems, and the adaptation to technological advances. Nowadays, neuropsychological assessment plays a fundamental role in characterizing cognitive decline in the different stages of dementia, but more efforts are needed to develop harmonized procedures that facilitate its use in different clinical contexts and research protocols.

Effect of blood collection tube containing protease inhibitors on the pre-analytical stability of Alzheimer's disease plasma biomarkers

The reliability of plasma biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD) can be compromised by protease-induced degradation. This can limit the feasibility of conducting plasma biomarker studies in environments that lack the capacity for immediate processing and appropriate storage of blood samples. We hypothesized that blood collection tube supplementation with protease inhibitors can improve the stability of plasma biomarkers at room temperatures (RT). In this study, we conducted a comparative analysis of blood biomarker stability in traditional ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) tubes versus BD™ P100 collection tubes, the latter being coated with a protease inhibitor cocktail. The stability of six plasma AD biomarkers was evaluated over time under RT conditions. We evaluated three experimental approaches. In Approach 1, pooled plasma samples underwent storage at RT for up to 96 h. In Approach 2, plasma samples isolated upfront from whole blood collected into EDTA or P100 tubes were stored at RT for 0 h or 24 h before biomarker measurements. In Approach 3, whole blood samples were collected into paired EDTA and P100 tubes, followed by storage at RT for 0 h or 24 h before isolating the plasma for analyses. Biomarkers were measured with Single Molecule Array (Simoa) and immunoprecipitation-mass spectrometry (IP-MS) assays. Both the IP-MS and Simoa methods revealed that the use of P100 tubes significantly improves the stability of Aβ42 and Aβ40 across all approaches. However, the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio levels were significantly stabilized only in the IP-MS assay in Approach 3. No significant differences were observed in the levels of plasma p-tau181, GFAP, and NfL for samples collected using either tube type in any of the approaches. Supplementation of blood collection tubes with protease inhibitors could reduce the protease-induced degradation of plasma Aβ42 and Aβ40, and the Aβ42/40 ratio for the IP-MS assay. These findings have crucial implications for preanalytical procedures, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Sex differences in Alzheimer's disease blood biomarkers in a Caribbean population of African ancestry: The Tobago Health Study

INTRODUCTION

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is increasing in the Caribbean, especially for persons of African ancestry (PAA) and women. However, studies have mostly utilized surveys without AD biomarkers.

METHODS

In the Tobago Health Study (n = 309; 109 women, mean age 70.3 ± 6.6), we assessed sex differences and risk factors for serum levels of phosphorylated tau-181 (p-tau181), amyloid-beta (Aβ)42/40 ratio, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light chain (NfL). Blood samples were from 2010 to 2013 for men and from 2019 to 2023 for women.

RESULTS

Women were more obese, hypertensive, and sedentary but reported less smoking and alcohol use than men (age-adjusted p < 0.04). Compared to men, women had worse levels of AD biomarkers, with higher p-tau181 and lower Aβ42/40, independent of covariates (p < 0.001). In sex-stratified analyses, higher p-tau181 was associated with older age in women and with hypertension in men. GFAP and NfL did not differ by sex.

DISCUSSION

Women had worse AD biomarkers than men, unexplained by age, cardiometabolic diseases, or lifestyle. Studying risk factors for AD in PAA is warranted, especially for women earlier in life.

Plasma biomarkers identify older adults at risk of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias in a real-world population-based cohort

INTRODUCTION

Plasma biomarkers-cost effective, non-invasive indicators of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related disorders (ADRD)-have largely been studied in clinical research settings. Here, we examined plasma biomarker profiles and their associated factors in a population-based cohort to determine whether they could identify an at-risk group, independently of brain and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers.

METHODS

We measured plasma phosphorylated tau181 (p-tau181), neurofilament light chain (NfL), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and amyloid beta (Aβ)42/40 ratio in 847 participants from a population-based cohort in southwestern Pennsylvania.

RESULTS

K-medoids clustering identified two distinct plasma Aβ42/40 modes, further categorizable into three biomarker profile groups: normal, uncertain, and abnormal. In different groups, plasma p-tau181, NfL, and GFAP were inversely correlated with Aβ42/40, Clinical Dementia Rating, and memory composite score, with the strongest associations in the abnormal group.

DISCUSSION

Abnormal plasma Aβ42/40 ratio identified older adult groups with lower memory scores, higher dementia risks, and higher ADRD biomarker levels, with potential implications for population screening.

HIGHLIGHTS

Population-based plasma biomarker studies are lacking, particularly in cohorts without cerebrospinal fluid or neuroimaging data. In the Monongahela-Youghiogheny Healthy Aging Team study (n = 847), plasma biomarkers associated with worse memory and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR), apolipoprotein E ε4, and greater age. Plasma amyloid beta (Aβ)42/40 ratio levels allowed clustering participants into abnormal, uncertain, and normal groups. Plasma Aβ42/40 correlated differently with neurofilament light chain, glial fibrillary acidic protein, phosphorylated tau181, memory composite, and CDR in each group. Plasma biomarkers can enable relatively affordable and non-invasive community screening for evidence of Alzheimer's disease and related disorders pathophysiology.

The role of cerebrospinal fluid and other biomarker modalities in the Alzheimer's disease diagnostic revolution

A major transformation in dementia diagnosis and care appears imminent and will depend on three major types of biomarkers: molecular imaging, blood-based biomarkers, and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers. Each modality has unique strengths and limitations that suggest its optimal uses in research, clinical trials, and clinical diagnosis.

Improving generalizability and study design of Alzheimer's disease cohort studies in the United States by including under-represented populations

The poor generalizability of clinical research data due to the enrollment of highly educated, non-Latinx White participants hampers the development of therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Black and Latinx older adults have a greater risk for dementia, yet it is unclear how health-care disparities and sociocultural factors influence potential AD therapies and prognosis. Low enrollment of under-represented populations may be attributable to several factors including greater exclusion due to higher rates of comorbidities, lower access to AD clinics, and the legacy of unethical treatment in medical research. This perspective outlines solutions tested in the Brain Health Registry (BHR) and the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), including culturally-informed digital research methods, community-engaged research strategies, leadership from under-represented communities, and the reduction of exclusion criteria based on comorbidities. Our successes demonstrate that it is possible to increase the inclusion and engagement of under-represented populations into US-based clinical studies, thereby increasing the generalizability of their results.

Plasma biomarkers for neurodegenerative disorders: ready for prime time?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several plasma biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease and related disorders (ADRD) have demonstrated clinical and technical robustness. However, are they ready for clinical implementation? This review critically appraises current evidence for and against the immediate use of plasma biomarkers in clinical care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Plasma biomarkers have significantly improved our understanding of ADRD time-course, risk factors, diagnosis and prognosis. These advances are accelerating the development and in-human testing of therapeutic candidates, and the selection of individuals with subtle biological evidence of disease who fit the criteria for early therapeutic targeting. However, standardized tests and well validated cut-off values are lacking. Moreover, some assays (e.g., plasma Aβ methods) have poor robustness to withstand inevitable day-to-day technical variations. Additionally, recent reports suggest that common comorbidities of aging (e.g., kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension) can erroneously affect plasma biomarker levels, clinical utility and generalizability. Furthermore, it is unclear if health disparities can explain reported racial/ethnic differences in biomarker levels and functions. Finally, current clinically approved plasma methods are more expensive than CSF assays, questioning their cost effectiveness.

SUMMARY

Plasma biomarkers have biological and clinical capacity to detect ADRD. However, their widespread use requires issues around thresholds, comorbidities and diverse populations to be addressed.

Using Alzheimer's disease blood tests to accelerate clinical trial enrollment

INTRODUCTION

Screening potential participants in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials with amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) is often time consuming and expensive.

METHODS

A web-based application was developed to model the time and financial cost of screening for AD clinical trials. Four screening approaches were compared; three approaches included an AD blood test at different stages of the screening process.

RESULTS

The traditional screening approach using only amyloid PET was the most time consuming and expensive. Incorporating an AD blood test at any point in the screening process decreased both the time and financial cost of trial enrollment. Improvements in AD blood test accuracy over currently available tests only marginally increased savings. Use of a high specificity cut-off may improve the feasibility of screening with only an AD blood test.

DISCUSSION

Incorporating AD blood tests into screening for AD clinical trials may reduce the time and financial cost of enrollment.

HIGHLIGHTS

The time and cost of enrolling participants in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials were modeled. A web-based application was developed to enable evaluation of key parameters. AD blood tests may decrease the time and financial cost of clinical trial enrollment. Improvements in AD blood test accuracy only marginally increased savings. Use of a high specificity cut-off may enable screening with only an AD blood test.

The Advisory Group on Risk Evidence Education for Dementia: Multidisciplinary and Open to All

The brain changes of Alzheimer's disease and other degenerative dementias begin long before cognitive dysfunction develops, and in people with subtle cognitive complaints, clinicians often struggle to predict who will develop dementia. The public increasingly sees benefits to accessing dementia risk evidence (DRE) such as biomarkers, predictive algorithms, and genetic information, particularly as this information moves from research to demonstrated usefulness in guiding diagnosis and clinical management. For example, the knowledge that one has high levels of amyloid in the brain may lead one to seek amyloid reducing medications, plan for disability, or engage in health promoting behaviors to fight cognitive decline. Researchers often hesitate to share DRE data, either because they are insufficiently validated or reliable for use in individuals, or there are concerns about assuring responsible use and ensuring adequate understanding of potential problems when one's biomarker status is known. Concerns include warning people receiving DRE about situations in which they might be compelled to disclose their risk status potentially leading to discrimination or stigma. The Advisory Group on Risk Evidence Education for Dementia (AGREEDementia) welcomes all concerned with how best to share and use DRE. Supporting understanding in clinicians, stakeholders, and people with or at risk for dementia and clearly delineating risks, benefits, and gaps in knowledge is vital. This brief overview describes elements that made this group effective as a model for other health conditions where there is interest in unfettered collaboration to discuss diagnostic uncertainty and the appropriate use and communication of health-related risk information.

Communicating and Using Dementia Risk Evidence

Advances in biomarkers, genetics, and other data used as dementia risk evidence (DRE) are increasingly informing clinical diagnosis and management. The purpose of this Mini-Forum is to provide a solutions-based discussion of the ethical and legal gaps and practical questions about how to use and communicate these data. Investigators often use DRE in research. When participants ask for their personal results, investigators have concerns. Will data that was intended to study groups be valid for individuals? Will sharing data cause distress? Debates around sharing DRE became heated when blood-based amyloid tests and amyloid reducing drugs appeared poised to enable clinicians easily to identify people with elevated brain amyloid and reduce it with a drug. Such an approach would transform the traditional role of DRE from investigational to foundational; however, then the high costs, uncertain clinical benefits and risks of the therapy led to an urgent need for education to support clinical decision making. Further complicating DRE use are direct to consumer genetic testing and increasingly available biomarker testing. Withholding DRE becomes less feasible and public education around responsible use and understanding become vital. A critical answer to these legal and ethical issues is supporting education that clearly delineates known risks, benefits, and gaps in knowledge, and communication to promote understanding among researchers, clinicians, patients, and all stakeholders. This paper provides an overview and identifies general concepts and resource documents that support more informed discussions for individuals and interdisciplinary groups.