A generalizable data-driven model of atrophy heterogeneity and progression in memory clinic settings
Hannah Baumeister,Jacob W Vogel,Philip S Insel,Luca Kleineidam,Steffen Wolfsgruber,Melina Stark,Helena M Gellersen,Renat Yakupov,Matthias C Schmid,Falk Lüsebrink,Frederic Brosseron,Gabriel Ziegler,Silka D Freiesleben,Lukas Preis,Luisa-Sophie Schneider,Eike J Spruth,Slawek Altenstein,Andrea Lohse,Klaus Fliessbach,Ina R Vogt,Claudia Bartels,Björn H Schott,Ayda Rostamzadeh,Wenzel Glanz,Enise I Incesoy,Michaela Butryn,Daniel Janowitz,Boris-Stephan Rauchmann,Ingo Kilimann,Doreen Goerss,Matthias H Munk,Stefan Hetzer,Peter Dechent,Michael Ewers,Klaus Scheffler,Anika Wuestefeld,Olof Strandberg,Danielle van Westen,Niklas Mattsson-Carlgren,Shorena Janelidze,Erik Stomrud,Sebastian Palmqvist,Annika Spottke,Christoph Laske,Stefan Teipel,Robert Perneczky,Katharina Buerger,Anja Schneider,Josef Priller,Oliver Peters,Alfredo Ramirez,Jens Wiltfang,Michael T Heneka,Michael Wagner,Emrah Düzel,Frank Jessen,Oskar Hansson,David Berron
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awae118
IF: 14.5
2024-04-25
Brain
Abstract:Memory clinic patients are a heterogeneous population representing various aetiologies of pathological aging. It is unknown if divergent spatiotemporal progression patterns of brain atrophy, as previously described in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients, are prevalent and clinically meaningful in this group of older adults. To uncover distinct atrophy subtypes, we applied the Subtype and Stage Inference (SuStaIn) algorithm to baseline structural MRI data from 813 participants enrolled in the DELCODE cohort (mean ± SD age = 70.67 ± 6.07 years, 52% females). Participants were cognitively unimpaired (CU; n = 285) or fulfilled diagnostic criteria for subjective cognitive decline (SCD; n = 342), mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 118), or dementia of the Alzheimer's type (n = 68). Atrophy subtypes were compared in baseline demographics, fluid AD biomarker levels, the Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite (PACC-5), as well as episodic memory and executive functioning. PACC-5 trajectories over up to 240 weeks were examined. To test if baseline atrophy subtype and stage predicted clinical trajectories before manifest cognitive impairment, we analysed PACC-5 trajectories and MCI conversion rates of CU and SCD participants. Limbic-predominant and hippocampal-sparing atrophy subtypes were identified. Limbic-predominant atrophy first affected the medial temporal lobes, followed by further temporal and, finally, the remaining cortical regions. At baseline, this subtype was related to older age, more pathological AD biomarker levels, APOE ε4 carriership, and an amnestic cognitive impairment. Hippocampal-sparing atrophy initially occurred outside the temporal lobe with the medial temporal lobe spared up to advanced atrophy stages. This atrophy pattern also affected individuals with positive AD biomarkers and was associated with more generalised cognitive impairment. Limbic-predominant atrophy, in all and in only unimpaired participants, was linked to more negative longitudinal PACC-5 slopes than observed in participants without or with hippocampal-sparing atrophy and increased the risk of MCI conversion. SuStaIn modelling was repeated in a sample from the Swedish BioFINDER-2 cohort. Highly similar atrophy progression patterns and associated cognitive profiles were identified. Cross-cohort model generalizability, both on the subject and group level, were excellent, indicating reliable performance in previously unseen data. The proposed model is a promising tool for capturing heterogeneity among older adults at early at-risk states for AD in applied settings. The implementation of atrophy subtype- and stage-specific end-points may increase the statistical power of pharmacological trials targeting early AD.
neurosciences,clinical neurology