Pro: Can biomarkers be gold standards in Alzheimer's disease?

A brief history of Aβ imaging

β-Amyloid (Αβ) imaging revolutionized the in vivo assessment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) Αβ pathology and its changes over time, increasing our insights into Aβ deposition in the brain by providing highly accurate, reliable, and reproducible quantitative statements of regional and global Aβ burden in the brain, proving essential for the differential diagnosis, staging, and evaluation of disease-specific anti-Αβ therapeutic approaches. Longitudinal observations, coupled with different disease-specific biomarkers to assess potential downstream effects of Aβ, have confirmed that Αβ deposition in the brain starts decades before the onset of symptoms. Aβ imaging studies continue to refine our understanding of the role of Αβ deposition in AD, and its relation to other imaging and fluid biomarkers. HIGHLIGHTS: Αβ imaging revolutionized the in vivo assessment of Alzheimer's disease Αβ pathology. Αβ imaging has increased our insights into Aβ deposition in the brain by providing highly accurate, reliable, and reproducible quantitative statements of regional and global Αβ burden in the brain. Αβ imaging is essential for the differential diagnosis, staging, and evaluation of disease-specific anti-Αβ therapeutic approaches. Αβ imaging studies continue to refine our understanding of the role of Αβ deposition in Alzheimer's disease, and its relation to other imaging and fluid biomarkers.

Neuroimaging biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease and other dementias

In vivo imaging of β-amyloid (Aβ) has transformed the assessment of Aβ pathology and its changes over time, extending our insight into Aβ deposition in the brain by providing highly accurate, reliable, and reproducible quantitative statements of regional or global Aβ burden in the brain. This knowledge is essential for therapeutic trial recruitment and for the evaluation of anti-Aβ treatments. Although cross sectional evaluation of Aβ burden does not strongly correlate with cognitive impairment, it does correlate with cognitive (especially memory) decline and with a higher risk for conversion to AD in the aging population and MCI subjects. This suggests that Aβ deposition is a protracted pathological process starting well before the onset of symptoms. Longitudinal observations, coupled with different disease-specific biomarkers to assess potential downstream effects of Aβ are required to confirm this hypothesis and further elucidate the role of Aβ deposition in the course of Alzheimer's disease.

Piloting and validation of a novel self-administered online cognitive screening tool in normal older persons: the Cognitive Function Test

BACKGROUND

Subtle cognitive changes have been described that may predate the onset of clinically recognizable Alzheimer's disease (AD) and may reflect pathological changes in the brain that are detectable up to 10 years before the onset of AD. Early screening for cognitive status can have benefits in terms of early management and prevention strategies for cognitive decline.

METHOD

A novel computerized cognitive screening tool, the Cognitive Function Test (CFT), was compared with established paper tests of episodic memory, executive function and processing speed, domains previously shown to be predictive of AD, with 50 normal participants, Mini Mental State Examination ≥24, mean age 58.1, SD 5.6 years (range 50-65). An online version, self-administered by 195 eligible respondents without significant memory complaints or dementia, was assessed.

RESULTS

Significant correlations (r = 0.75, p < 0.0001) were found between the CFT and paper tests in a pilot study, showing concurrent validity. The pilot computerized tests were compared with the online version, and no differences were found in mean scores on the total test and domain-specific scores using an algorithm derived from the pilot CFT scores, thus showing internal consistency and reliability of the online format. Norms and 1.5 SD cut-offs for the CFT are presented.

CONCLUSION

The online CFT was shown to be suitable for self-administration in online format (with a mouse response mode) for this midlife age group. Individuals may wish to monitor their cognitive performance before memory concerns are sufficient to warrant visiting a GP or memory clinic.

Is Alzheimer's disease a homogeneous disease entity?

The epidemic proportions of dementia in old age are a cause of great concern for the medical profession and the society at large. It is customary to consider Alzheimer's disease (AD) as the most common cause of dementia, and vascular dementia (VaD) as being the second. This dichotomous view of a primary neurodegenerative disease as opposed to a disorder where extrinsic factors cause brain damage led to separate lines of research in these two entities. New biomarkers, particularly the introduction of modern neuroimaging and cerebrospinal fluid changes, have, in recent years, helped to identify anatomical and chemical changes of VaD and of AD. Nevertheless, there is a substantial difference between the two entities. While it is clear that VaD is a heterogeneous entity, AD is supposed to be a single disorder. Nobody attempts to use CADASIL as a template to develops treatment for sporadic VaD. On the other hand, early-onset AD is used to develop therapy for sporadic AD. This paper will discuss the problems relating to this false concept and its consequences.

How golden is the gold standard of neuropathology in dementia?

Current Alzheimer's disease (AD) criteria state that a definite diagnosis can only be made by postmortem examination. The neuropathological confirmation is often referred to as the "gold standard." In this article, we review what constitutes a gold standard and how the neuropathological examination of AD lives up to that standard. We conclude that there is no evidence for this notion because results between different laboratories differ to an important extent, especially when the clinical picture is in doubt, for example, when the dementia is mild. As an alternative, we propose to abandon thinking in standards and value neuropathology as any other biomarker, and to strive to use and integrate multiple sources of information to make the diagnosis of AD in all its complexity.

Targeting progressive neuroaxonal injury: lessons from multiple sclerosis

Neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), are characterized by progressive neuroaxonal injury, suggesting a common pathophysiological pathway. Identification and development of neuroprotective therapies for such diseases has proven a major challenge, particularly because of an already substantial neuroaxonal compromise at the time of initial onset of clinical symptoms. Methods for early identification of neurodegeneration are therefore vital to ensure that neuroprotective therapies are applied as early as possible. Recent investigations have enhanced our understanding of the role of neuroaxonal injury in multiple sclerosis (MS). As MS generally manifests earlier in life and can be diagnosed much earlier in the course of the disease than the above-mentioned 'classic' neurodegenerative diseases, it is possible that MS could be used as a model disease to study degeneration and regeneration of the CNS. The mechanism of neuroaxonal injury in MS is believed to be inflammation-led neurodegeneration; however, the reverse may also be true (i.e. neuroaxonal degeneration may precede inflammation). Animal models of PD, AD and ALS have shown that it is likely that most cases of disease are due to initial inflammation, followed by a degenerative process, providing a parallel between MS and the classic neurodegenerative diseases. Other common factors between MS and the neurodegenerative diseases include iron and mitochondrial dysregulation, abnormalities in α-synuclein and tau protein, and a number of immune mediators. Conventional MRI techniques, using markers such as T2-weighted lesions, gadolinium-enhancing lesions and T1-weighted hypointensities, are readily available and routinely used in clinical practice; however, the utility of these MRI measures to predict disease progression in MS is limited. More recently, MRI techniques that provide more pathology-specific data have been applied in MS studies, including magnetic resonance spectroscopy, magnetization transfer ratio and myelin water imaging. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-MRI technique that quantifies optic nerve integrity and retinal ganglion cell loss as markers of neuroaxonal injury; more research is needed to evaluate whether information obtained from OCT is a reliable marker of axonal injury and long-term disability in MS. Using these advanced techniques, it may become possible to follow degeneration and regeneration longitudinally in patients with MS and to better differentiate the effects of drugs under investigation. Currently available immune-directed therapies that are approved by the US FDA for the first-line treatment of MS (interferon-β and glatiramer acetate) have been shown to decelerate the inflammatory process in MS; however, such therapy is less effective in preventing the progression of the disease and neuroaxonal injury. The use of MS as a clinical model to study modulation of neuroaxonal injury in the brain could have direct implications for the development of treatment strategies in neurodegenerative diseases such as AD, PD and ALS.