Changes of plasma Aβ and t-tau along with 18F-florbetapir PET in a cohort of cognitive decline

Feng-Feng Pan,Qi Huang,Ying Wang,Yi-Fan Wang,Yi-Hui Guan,Fang Xie,Qihao Guo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-615251/v1
2021-01-01
Abstract:Abstract Background Blood based biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are becoming increasingly promising. Although plasma amyloid-β (Aβ) and total tau (t-tau) showed a potential ability in identifying cerebral amyloid deposition and AD. Comparisons of these plasma biomarkers along with Aβ-PET in a cohort of normal controls (NC), subjective cognitive decline (SCD), objectively-defined subtle cognitive decline (Obj-SCD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD remained lacking. Methods A total of 407 individuals aged from 40 to 90 years old were recruited, including 76 of NC, 77 of SCD, 61 of obj-SCD, 92 of MCI and 101 of AD. Plasma Aβ40, Aβ42 and t-tau were examined via single-molecule array (Simoa) immunoassay. A subset of 132 individuals underwent cerebral amyloid scans with 18F-florbetapir PET. Comparisons of plasma t-tau, Aβ40, Aβ42 and Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio were conducted between different diagnostic groups and cerebral Aβ burdens. Pearson correlation analysis was used to evaluate the correlation between Aβ42, Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio and 18F-florbetapir SUVR. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were carried out to evaluate the capacity of plasma biomarkers in identifying high brain Aβ burden and diagnosis of AD. Results Plasma Aβ42 was significantly higher in SCD and obj-SCD than NC, MCI and AD. Plasma Aβ40 was significantly higher in SCD and obj-SCD than NC and AD. The lowest levels of plasma Aβ42 and Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio were found in AD. No significant difference of plasma t-tau was found among groups. Plasma Aβ42 and Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio were inversely correlated with 18F-florbetapir SUVR (r=-0.272, P = 0.003; r=-0.211, P = 0.021 respectively). Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio performed well in predicting high brain Aβ burden (area under the curve, AUC = 0.762). Plasma Aβ42 and Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio had acceptable diagnostic accuracy for AD (AUC = 0.714 and 0.706 respectively), even in Aβ-PET (+) individuals (AUC = 0.728 and 0.808 respectively). Conclusions Plasma Aβ40 and Aβ42 measured by Simoa immunoassay showed a significantly bidirectional trend of initially increasing from NC to SCD and obj-SCD, and then declining to MCI and AD. In addition, plasma Aβ was significantly correlated with 18F-florbetapir PET SUVR and showed potential value in predicting cerebral Aβ deposition and risk of AD.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?