Tau-PET and in vivo Braak-staging as a prognostic marker in Alzheimer’s disease - Biel, Davina; Brendel, Matthias; Rubinski, Anna; Buerger, Katharina; Janowitz, Daniel; Dichgans, Martin; Franzmeier, Nicolai; for the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (medRxiv, 2021)
INTRODUCTION Tau pathology in Alzheimer’s disease tracks clinical status more closely than beta-amyloid. Thus, tau-PET may be a promising prognostic marker for cognitive decline. Here, we systematically compared tau-PET and Braak-staging vs. amyloid-PET as predictors of cognitive decline.METHODS We included 396 cognitively normal to dementia subjects with 18F-Flutemetamol/18F-Florbetapir-amyloid-PET, 18F-Flortaucipir-tau-PET and ~2-year cognitive assessments. Annual cognitive change rates were calculated via linear-mixed models. We determined global amyloid-PET, global tau-PET, and tau-PET-based Braak-stage (Braak0/BraakI+/BraakI-IV+/BraakI-VI+/Braakatypical+). In bootstrapped linear regression, we assessed whether tau-PET outperformed amyloid-PET in predicting cognitive decline. Using ANCOVAs, we tested whether later Braak-stage predicted accelerated cognitive decline and determined Braak-stage-specific conversion risk to MCI or dementia.RESULTS Global tau-PET was a better predictor of cognitive decline than global amyloid-PET (p<0.001). Advanced Braak-stage was associated with faster cognitive decline (p<0.001) and elevated clinical conversion risk.DISCUSSION Tau-PET and Braak-staging show promise for predicting patient-specific risk of clinical AD progression.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe study was funded by grants from the LMU (FoeFoLe, 1032, awarded to NF), the Hertie foundation for clinical neurosciences (awarded to NF), the SyNergy excellence cluster (EXC 2145/ID 390857198) and the German Research Foundation (DFG, INST 409/193-1 FUGG).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics approval was obtained by the ADNI investigators from the local ethical committees of all involved sites. Access to all ADNI data was granted to the investigators of the current study after registration to ADNI (https://adni.loni.usc.edu) and compliance with the data usage agreement. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and all study participants provided written informed consent. All work complied with ethical regulations for work with human participants.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data used in this manuscript are publicly available from the ADNI database (adni.loni.usc.edu) upon registration and compliance with the data use agreement. The data that support the findings of this study are available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.