In 2011, the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer’s Association created separate diagnostic recommendations for the preclinical, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia stages of Alzheimer’s disease. Scientific progress in the interim led to an initiative by the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer’s Association to update and unify the 2011 guidelines. This unifying update is labeled a “research framework” because its intended use is for observational and interventional research, not routine clinical care. In the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer’s Association Research Framework, Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is defined by its underlying pathologic processes that can be documented by postmortem examination or in vivo by biomarkers. The diagnosis is not based on the clinical consequences of the disease (i.e., symptoms/signs) in this research framework, which shifts the definition of AD in living people from a syndromal to a biological construct. The research framework focuses on the diagnosis of AD with biomarkers in living persons. Biomarkers are grouped into those of β amyloid deposition, pathologic tau, and neurodegeneration [AT(N)]. This ATN classification system groups different biomarkers (imaging and biofluids) by the pathologic process each measures. The AT(N) system is flexible in that new biomarkers can be added to the three existing AT(N) groups, and new biomarker groups beyond AT(N) can be added when they become available. We focus on AD as a continuum, and cognitive staging may be accomplished using continuous measures. However, we also outline two different categorical cognitive schemes for staging the severity of cognitive impairment: a scheme using three traditional syndromal categories and a six-stage numeric scheme. It is important to stress that this framework seeks to create a common language with which investigators can generate and test hypotheses about the interactions among different pathologic processes (denoted by biomarkers) and cognitive symptoms. We appreciate the concern that this biomarker-based research framework has the potential to be misused. Therefore, we emphasize, first, it is premature and inappropriate to use this research framework in general medical practice. Second, this research framework should not be used to restrict alternative approaches to hypothesis testing that do not use biomarkers. There will be situations where biomarkers are not available or requiring them would be counterproductive to the specific research goals (discussed in more detail later in the document). Thus, biomarker-based research should not be considered a template for all research into age-related cognitive impairment and dementia; rather, it should be applied when it is fit for the purpose of the specific research goals of a study. Importantly, this framework should be examined in diverse populations. Although it is possible that β-amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tau deposits are not causal in AD pathogenesis, it is these abnormal protein deposits that define AD as a unique neur...

A growing awareness about brain health and Alzheimer's disease in the general population is leading to an increasing number of cognitively unimpaired individuals, who are concerned that they have reduced cognitive function, to approach the medical system for help. The term subjective cognitive decline (SCD) was conceived in 2014 to describe this condition. Epidemiological data provide evidence that the risk for mild cognitive impairment and dementia is increased in individuals with SCD. However, the majority of individuals with SCD will not show progressive cognitive decline. An individually tailored diagnostic process might be reasonable to identify or exclude underlying medical conditions in an individual with SCD who actively seeks medical help. An increasing number of studies are investigating the link between SCD and the very early stages of Alzheimer's disease and other neurodegenerative diseases.

Radiography-and-CT-for-Suspected-COVID19-Infection (accessed March 23, 2020).

Biomarker discovery and development for clinical research, diagnostics and therapy monitoring in clinical trials have advanced rapidly in key areas of medicine, notably oncology and cardiovascular diseases, allowing for rapid early detection and supporting the evolution of biomarker-guided precision medicine-based targeted therapies. In Alzheimer’s disease (AD), breakthroughs in biomarker identification and validation include the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and positron emission tomography (PET) markers of amyloid β (Aβ) and tau proteins, which are highly accurate in detecting the presence of pathophysiological and neuropathological changes of AD. However, their high cost, insufficient accessibility, or invasiveness may limit their use as viable first-line tools for detecting patterns of pathophysiology. Therefore, a multi-stage, tiered approach is needed, prioritizing development of an initial screen to exclude from these tests the high numbers of people with cognitive deficits who do not demonstrate evidence of underlying AD pathophysiology. This perspective summarizes the efforts of a working group that aimed to survey the current landscape of blood-based AD biomarkers, and outlines operational steps for an effective academic-industry co-development and path forward from identification and assay development to validation for clinical use.

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with a complex and heterogeneous pathophysiology. The number of people living with AD is predicted to increase; however, there are no disease-modifying therapies currently available and none have been successful in late-stage clinical trials. Fluid biomarkers measured in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or blood hold promise for enabling more effective drug development and establishing a more personalized medicine approach for AD diagnosis and treatment. Biomarkers used in drug development programmes should be qualified for a specific context of use (COU). These COUs include, but are not limited to, subject/patient selection, assessment of disease state and/or prognosis, assessment of mechanism of action, dose optimization, drug response monitoring, efficacy maximization, and toxicity/adverse reactions identification and minimization. The core AD CSF biomarkers Aβ42, t-tau, and p-tau are recognized by research guidelines for their diagnostic utility and are being considered for qualification for subject selection in clinical trials. However, there is a need to better understand their potential for other COUs, as well as identify additional fluid biomarkers reflecting other aspects of AD pathophysiology. Several novel fluid biomarkers have been proposed, but their role in AD pathology and their use as AD biomarkers have yet to be validated. In this review, we summarize some of the pathological mechanisms implicated in the sporadic AD and highlight the data for several established and novel fluid biomarkers (including BACE1, TREM2, YKL-40, IP-10, neurogranin, SNAP-25, synaptotagmin, α-synuclein, TDP-43, ferritin, VILIP-1, and NF-L) associated with each mechanism. We discuss the potential COUs for each biomarker.

Introduction: In this multicenter study on subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in community-based and memory clinic settings, we assessed the (1) incidence of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and non-AD dementia and (2) determinants of progression to dementia. Methods: Eleven cohorts provided 2978 participants with SCD and 1391 controls. We estimated dementia incidence and identified risk factors using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: In SCD, incidence of dementia was 17.7 (95% Poisson confidence interval 15.2–20.3)/1000 person-years (AD: 11.5 [9.6–13.7], non-AD: 6.1 [4.7–7.7]), compared with 14.2 (11.3–17.6) in controls (AD: 10.1 [7.7–13.0], non-AD: 4.1 [2.6–6.0]). The risk of dementia was strongly increased in SCD in a memory clinic setting but less so in a community-based setting. In addition, higher age (hazard ratio 1.1 [95% confidence interval 1.1–1.1]), lower Mini-Mental State Examination (0.7 [0.66–0.8]), and apolipoprotein E ε4 (1.8 [1.3–2.5]) increased the risk of dementia. Discussion: SCD can precede both AD and non-AD dementia. Despite their younger age, individuals with SCD in a memory clinic setting have a higher risk of dementia than those in community-based cohorts.

Background The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers amyloid beta 1–42, total tau, and phosphorylated tau are used increasingly for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) research and patient management. However, there are large variations in biomarker measurements among and within laboratories. Methods Data from the first nine rounds of the Alzheimer’s Association quality control program was used to define the extent and sources of analytical variability. In each round, three CSF samples prepared at the Clinical Neurochemistry Laboratory (Mölndal, Sweden) were analyzed by single-analyte enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), a multiplexing xMAP assay, or an immunoassay with electrochemoluminescence detection. Results A total of 84 laboratories participated. Coefficients of variation (CVs) between laboratories were around 20% to 30%; within-run CVs, less than 5% to 10%; and longitudinal within-laboratory CVs, 5% to 19%. Interestingly, longitudinal within-laboratory CV differed between biomarkers at individual laboratories, suggesting that a component of it was assay dependent. Variability between kit lots and between laboratories both had a major influence on amyloid beta 1–42 measurements, but for total tau and phosphorylated tau, between-kit lot effects were much less than between-laboratory effects. Despite the measurement variability, the between-laboratory consistency in classification of samples (using prehoc-derived cutoffs for AD) was high (>90% in 15 of 18 samples for ELISA and in 12 of 18 samples for xMAP). Conclusions The overall variability remains too high to allow assignment of universal biomarker cutoff values for a specific intended use. Each laboratory must ensure longitudinal stability in its measurements and use internally qualified cutoff levels. Further standardization of laboratory procedures and improvement of kit performance will likely increase the usefulness of CSF AD biomarkers for researchers and clinicians.

Translational Biomarkers in Aging and Dementia (TRIAD) study, Alzheimer's and Families (ALFA) study, and BioCogBank Paris Lariboisière cohort IMPORTANCE Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) is a marker of reactive astrogliosis that increases in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood of individuals with Alzheimer disease (AD). However, it is not known whether there are differences in blood GFAP levels across the entire AD continuum and whether its performance is similar to that of CSF GFAP.OBJECTIVE To evaluate plasma GFAP levels throughout the entire AD continuum, from preclinical AD to AD dementia, compared with CSF GFAP.