Plasma neurofilament light chain predicts Alzheimer’s disease in patients with subjective cognitive decline and mild cognitive impairment: a longitudinal study

2.1. Patients

We enrolled 140 consecutive patients (45 SCD, 73 MCI, 22 AD-D) referred to the Centre for Adult Cognitive Disorders of Careggi Hospital in Florence for assessment of cognitive decline, between July 2018 and November 2022. We included patients who met criteria for clinical diagnosis of AD-D¹⁶, MCI², or SCD¹. Exclusion criteria were: history of head injury, current systemic and/or neurological disease other than AD, major depression or substance use disorder. At baseline, all patients underwent comprehensive clinical assessment, neurological examination, extensive neuropsychological investigation (as described in detail elsewhere¹⁷), and blood collection for measurement of plasma NfL concentration and Apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype analysis. We defined age at baseline as the age at the time of plasma collection, disease duration as the time from the onset of symptoms to baseline examination, and positive family history of dementia if one or more first-degree relatives were reported to have documented cognitive decline. One-hundred-ten patients (30 SCD, 60 MCI, 20 AD-D) underwent CSF collection for Aβ₄₂, Aβ₄₂/Aβ₄₀, total-tau (t-tau) and phosphorylated-tau (p-tau). Among these, 28 patients (16 SCD, 9 MCI, 3 AD-D) also underwent cerebral amyloid-PET, and 93 patients (23 SCD, 51 MCI, 19 AD-D) also underwent ¹⁸F-Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET brain scan (FDG-PET). Normal values for CSF biomarkers were: Aβ₄₂>670 pg/ml, Aβ₄₂/Aβ₄₀ ratio>0.062, t-tau<400 pg/ml and p-tau<60 pg/ml¹⁸.

Methods used for APOE genotyping¹⁹, CSF collection and biomarker analysis, brain ¹⁸F-FDG-PET and amyloid-PET acquisition and rating²⁰ are described in further detail elsewhere (see Bessi et al.¹⁹ and Mazzeo et al.²⁰ respectively).

Seventy-seven patients (30 SCD and 47 MCI) underwent neuropsychological examination after two years. From 48 of them (19 SCD, 29 MCI) blood samples were collected two years after baseline to repeat the NfL measure. Progression to MCI and to AD was defined according to the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association (NIA-AA) criteria^{2, 16} by two trained neurologists (SM and VB) who were blinded to the plasma NfL results.

2.2. Standard Protocol Approvals

The study procedures and data analysis were performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and with the ethical standards of the Committee on Human Experimentation of our Institute. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Careggi University Hospital (Florence, Italy, reference 15691oss). All individuals involved in this research agreed to participate and to have details and results of the research about them published.

2.3. Plasma collection and NfL analysis

Blood was collected by venipuncture into standard polypropylene EDTA test tubes (Sarstedt, Nümbrecht, Germany) and centrifuged within two hours at 1300 rcf at 4°C for 10 minutes. Plasma was isolated and stored at −80°C until testing. Plasma NfL analysis was performed with Simoa NF-Light SR-X kit (cat. No. 103400) for human samples provided by Quanterix Corporation (Lexington, MA, USA) on the automatized Simoa SR-X platform (GBIO, Hangzhou, China), following the manufacturer’s instructions. The lower limits of quantification and detection provided by the kit were 0.316 and 0.0552 pg/mL, respectively. The plasma NfL concentrations in all samples were detected in a single run. Quality controls with a low NfL concentration of 5.08 pg/mL and a high NfL concentration of 169 pg/mL were included in the array and assessed with samples. A calibration curve was constructed from the measurements of serially diluted calibrators provided by Quanterix. Plasma samples and controls were diluted at a 1:4 ratio and measured in duplicate with calibrators.

2.4. Classification of patients according to the ATN classification

Based on biomarker results, patients were classified according to the NIA-AA Research Framework²¹: patients were rated as A+ if at least one of the amyloid biomarkers (CSF or amyloid PET) revealed the presence of Aβ pathology, and as A- if none of the biomarkers revealed the presence of Aβ pathology. In the case of discordant CSF and Amyloid PET results, we considered only the pathological result. Patients were classified as T+ or T- if CSF p-tau concentrations were higher or lower than the cut-off value, respectively. Patients were classified as N+ if at least one neurodegeneration biomarker was positive (CSF t-tau higher than the cut-off value or positive FDG-PET). Considering our sample size, to avoid too small groups, we considered T and N parameters together as TN+ if they were T+ and/or N+, and TN- if both T and N were negative. Finally, we defined four groups: normal AD biomarkers (A-/T-/N-), non-AD pathologic change (A-/TN+), Alzheimer’s pathologic change (A+, including A+/T-/N-patients and one patient with A+/T-/N+), and AD (A+/T+/N+, including A+/TN+ and A+/T+/N+).

2.5. Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Software Version 25 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA) and the computing environment R4.2.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, 2013). All p-values were two-tailed and the significance level for all analyses was set at p=0.05. Distributions of all variables were assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. As NfL was not normally distributed, we applied log10 transformation. This transformation resulted in a more normally distributed dataset that met the assumptions of the statistical tests that we planned to use. We conducted descriptive statistics using means and standard deviations (SD) for continuous variables and frequencies or percentages and 95% confidence intervals (95%C.I.) for categorical variables. We used t-test for comparison between two groups, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni post-hoc test for comparison between three or more groups, Pearson’s correlation coefficient to evaluate correlations between groups’ numeric measures, and chi-square test to compare categorical data. To adjust for possible confounding factors, we used analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). We constructed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to evaluate the performance of plasma NfL in predicting ATN status and progression of cognitive decline. We used the Youden method to determine the optimal cut-off value for NfL and calculated accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). We used Kaplan-Meier survival analyses with pairwise log-rank to compare proportions of progression of cognitive decline among groups. We used Cox regression analysis to ascertain that the effect of NfL on progression from SCD to MCI was independent from other covariates. The consistency of NfL measures over time was computed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). We used repeated measures ANOVA to investigate the effect of progression of cognitive decline and ATN status on the change in NfL concentration over time. We calculated the size effect using Cohen’s d for normally distributed numeric measures, η² for ANOVA and Cramer’s V for categorical data.

3.1. Comparisons between groups

NfL levels were significantly different between SCD, MCI and AD-D groups (F[2,136]=14.99, p<0.001, η²=0.181) (Figure 1.A). Demographic features and differences between groups are summarized in Table 1. NfL concentration was correlated with age at baseline (Pearson=0.549, p<0.001) and MMSE (Pearson=-0.291, p=0.001). There were no differences in NfL concentrations between males and females (p=0.222) or between APOEε4+ and APOEε4-(p=0.579). The significant effect of diagnosis group (SCD, MCI and AD-D) on NfL concentration was confirmed after controlling for age, education, MMSE and APOE genotype (F[2,119]=3.51, p=0.033, partial η²=0.056, Supplementary table 1.A).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1. LogNfL levels across groups

Values quoted in the y-axis indicate LogNfL levels. Horizontal bars indicate significant differences between groups.

A. Comparisons between diagnosis groups: SCD vs. MCI (p = 0.002, Cohen’s d = 0.671); SCD vs. AD (p <□0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.394); MCI vs. AD (p = 0.010, Cohen’s d = 0.723).

B. Comparisons between ATN groups: A-/T-/N- vs. A-/TN+ (p = 0.765, Cohen’s d = 0.537); A-/T-/N- vs. A+/T-/N- (p = 1.00, Cohen’s d = 1.249); A-/T-/N- vs. A+ (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.562); A-/T-/N- vs. ATN+ (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.562); A-/TN+ vs. A+ (p = 1.00, Cohen’s d = 0.394); A-/TN+ vs. ATN+ (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.419); A+ vs. ATN+ (p < 0.01, Cohen’s d = 1.419)

C. Comparisons diagnosis/ATN groups: SCD/ATN- vs. SCD/ATN+ (p = 0.003, Cohen’s d = 1.571, MCI/ATN+ (p <□0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.747); SCD/ATN- vs. AD (p <□0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.880); MCI/ATN- vs. MCI/ATN+ (p <□0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.343); MCI/ATN- vs. AD (p <□0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.476); SCD/ATN- vs. MCI/ATN- (p = 1.00, Cohen’s d = 0,447); SCD/ATN+ vs. MCI/ATN+ (p = 1.00, Cohen’s d = 0.176); MCI/ATN+ vs. AD (p = 1.00, Cohen’s d = 0.133).

D. Comparisons between progression groups: np-SCD vs. p-SCD (p = 0.428, Cohen’s d = 0.729); np-SCD vs. np-MCI (p = 0.020, Cohen’s d = 0.846); np-SCD vs. p-MCI groups (p = 0.003, Cohen’s d = 1.250); p-SCD vs. np-MCI (p = 1.00, Cohen’s d = 0.117), p-SCD vs. p-MCI (p = 1.00, Cohen’s d = 0.521); np-MCI vs. p-MCI (p = 1.00, Cohen’s d = 0.404).

3.2. Biomarker profiles

Based on AD biomarker results, patients were classified as follows: 33 (30.0%) A-/T-N-, 11 (10.0%) A-/TN+, 12 (10.9%) A+, and 54 (49.1%) ATN+. Detailed distribution of CSF biomarker concentrations and frequencies of positive amyloid-PET and FDG-PET as well as comparisons between groups are reported in Supplementary table 2. Concordant and discordant results between CSF and PET are shown in Supplementary table 3.

3.3. Distribution of NfL concentration across ATN groups

NfL levels differed between ATN groups, also after adjusting for age, education, MMSE and APOE (F[3,96]=7.190, p<0.001, η²=0.160). Post-hoc analysis showed that ATN+ had higher NfL levels than A-/T-/N- (p<0.001, d=1.562), A-/TN+ (p=0.015, d=1.026) and A+ (p=0.001, d=1.419). There was no difference between A-/T-/N- and A-/TN+ (p=0.765, d=0.537), between A-/T-/N- and A+ (p=1.00, d=0.143) and between A-/TN+ and A+ (p=1.00, d=0.394) (Figure 1.B). Based on these results, for subsequent analysis, we merged A-/T-/N-, A-/TN+, and A+ into an ATN- group.

3.4. Distribution of NfL concentration across diagnosis/ATN subgroups

To explore the interaction between diagnosis and ATN group on NfL concentration, we classified patients according to diagnosis (SCD, MCI, AD-D) and ATN classification (ATN-, ATN+). As only one AD-D patient was ATN-, we did not split the AD-D group. The groups consisted of 21 SCD/ATN-, nine SCD/ATN+, 33 MCI/ATN-, 27 MCI/ATN+, and 20 AD-D. SCD/ATN-patients were younger than SCD/ATN+ (61.46±6.92 vs. 71.06 vs. 7.63, p=0.002). MCI/ATN-were younger (67.95±8.49 vs. 73.38±5.56, p=0.004) and had lower frequencies of APOEε4+ (37.50% [95%C.I.=18.13:56.87] vs. 66.67% [95% C.I.=48.89:84.45], χ²⁼9.31, p=0.002) than MCI/ANT+. There were no differences in neuropsychological scores between SCD/ATN- and SCD/ATN+ and between MCI/ATN- and MCI/ATN+ (Supplementary table 4). NfL levels were significantly different between the diagnosis/ATN subgroups (F[5, 103]=13.50, p<0.001, η²=0.396). Differences in NfL concentration between groups were also confirmed after controlling for age, MMSE, MMSE and APOE (F[4,95]=6.95, p<0.001, partial η²=0.226, Supplementary table 1.B). Post-hoc analysis showed that SCD/ATN- had lower NfL concentrations than SCD/ATN+ (p=0.003, d=1.571), MCI/ATN+ (p<0.001, d =1.747) and AD-D (p<0.001, d=1.880). MCI/ATN- had lower NfL concentrations than MCI/ATN+ (p<0.001, d=1.343) and AD-D (p<0.001, d=1.476). There were no differences between SCD/ATN- and MCI/ATN- (p=1.00, d=0.447) or between SCD/ATN+, MCI/ATN+, and AD-D (p=1.00, d=0.133) (Figure 1.C).

3.5. Accuracy of plasma NfL in predicting ATN status

NfL showed good accuracy in distinguishing between ATN+ and ATN- in SCD and MCI groups (AUC 0.815 and 0.818, respectively). In the SCD group, a cut-off of 19.45 pg/mL yielded the maximum Youden Index and discriminated ATN- and ATN+ patients with excellent specificity (95.24 [95% C.I.=87.62:100]), good PPV and NPV (83.33% [95%C.I.=70.00:96.67]) but failed in sensitivity (55.56% [95%C.I.=37.77:73.34]). Similarly, in the MCI group a cut-off of 20.49 pg/mL had excellent specificity (93.94% [95%C.I.=87.90:99.98]), with very good PPV, fair NPV and poor sensitivity (62.96% [95%C.I.=50.74:75.18]). Finally, when we merged SCD and MCI, a cut-off of 20.03 pg/mL yielded the maximum Youden Index, discriminating ATN- and ATN+ patients with excellent specificity (94.44% [95%C.I.=89.71:99.18]), good PPV, fair NPV (78.46%[95%C.I.=69.97:86.95]) and poor sensitivity (61.1%[95%C.I.=51.04:71.18]) (Figure 2).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2. NfL accuracy in predicting ATN status

ROC curves for accuracy of NfL in distinguishing ATN- and ATN + groups in SCD, MCI and in SCD+MCI. Colored shapes indicate 95% C.I. Cut-off values estimated by Youden’s method. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV are expressed as percentages (95% C.I.). AUC = area under the curve; PPV = positive predictive value; NPV = negative predictive value.

3.6. Trajectories of cognitive decline over time and comparison between progression groups

During follow-up, nine (30%) SCD patients progressed to MCI and were classified as p- SCD. Fourteen (29.79%) MCI patients developed dementia (p-MCI). None of the SCD patients developed dementia. Patients who did not progress were classified as np-SCD (21, 70.00%) and np-MCI (33, 70.21%). p-MCI had higher frequency of APOEε4⁺ (p=0.017, V=0.348) and lower scores in minimental-state examination (p=0.002, d=1.239, Table 2) and in two tests for verbal memory (Supplementary table 5). There were no differences between np-SCD and p-SCD at baseline in demographic features, APOEε4⁺, MMSE scores, or neuropsychological scoresTable 1. Comparisons between diagnosis groups

Baseline NfL levels were significantly different between patients who progressed and patients who did not progress from SCD to MCI or from MCI to dementia (F[5,103]=5.06, p=0.003, η²=0.172). Post-hoc analysis showed that np-SCD had lower NfL concentration than np-MCI (p=0.020, d=0.846) and p-MCI groups (p=0.003, d =1.250) (Figure 1.D).

3.7. Effect of NfL group on the risk of progression of cognitive decline

We classified patients according to the previously identified cut-off values (NfL-=lower than cut-off values; NfL+=higher than cut-off value): seven (15.56%) SCD patients had NfL concentrations higher than 19.45 pg/mL and 23 (31.51%) MCI patients had NfL concentrations higher than 20.49 pg/mL. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a higher proportion of progression from SCD to MCI in the SCD/NfL+ group (80.00% [95%C.I.=44.94:100]) as compared to SCD/NfL-(22.73% [95%C.I.=5.22:40.24]; Log-rank χ²=9.79, p=0.002). There was no difference in the distribution of progression from MCI to AD dementia (Log-rank χ²=5.32, p=0.25) (Figure 3). To evaluate the effect of dichotomized NfL on the rate of conversion from SCD to MCI, adjusting for possible confounding factors, we performed Cox’s proportional hazards regression analysis considering progression time as time and including age at baseline, years of education and APOE genotype as covariates. The regression model was significant (χ²=9.702, p=0.002) and NfL group was the only significant variable (p=0.007, HR=7.10 [95%C.I.=1.71:29.50]).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis for comparison of distributions of progression from SCD to MCI and from MCI to AD between NfL- and NfL+ groups

For patients who progressed, follow-up time indicates the time of progression. Number at risk and p values for pairwise log-rank comparisons between groups are reported. Colored shapes indicate 95% C.I.

3.8. Accuracy of plasma NfL in predicting progression of cognitive decline

In the SCD group, the cut-off of 19.45 pg/mL showed good accuracy (80.00% [95%C.I.=65.69:94.31]) with excellent specificity (95.24% [95%C.I.=87.62:100]), good PPV and NPV (80.00% [95%C.I.=65.69:94.31]), but not acceptable sensitivity (44.44% (95%C.I.=26.66:62.23]) in predicting progression to MCI. In the MCI group, NfL, with the cut-off value of 20.49 pg/mL, had fair specificity (70.97% [95%C.I.=57.71:84.23]) and NPV (75.86% [95%C.I.=63.63-:88.10]), but not acceptable sensitivity and PPV (≤50%) in predicting progression to dementia. Finally, considering SCD and MCI together, NfL had fair specificity and NPV (77.78% [95%C.I.=68.49:87.06]) but not acceptable sensitivity and PPV (47.83% [95%C.I.=36.67:58.98]) (Table 4).

3.9. Change of NfL concentration over time

Forty-eight patients (19 SCD, 29 MCI) underwent new blood collection for NfL measurement two years (T2) after baseline collection (T1). NfL measures were highly consistent over time (ICC=0.84 [95%C.I.=0.73:0.91], p<0.001). Considering the whole sample, the mean NfL change (ΔNfL) was 1.13±5.47 pg/mL in two years (0.71±2.98 pg/mL per year), with no differences between SCD and MCI. ΔNfL was correlated with age at baseline (Pearson=0.341, p=0.017), while there was no effect of disease duration, education, sex, family history of AD dementia, and APOE genotype on NfL change.

3.10. Effect of ATN status and progression of cognitive decline on NfL over time

A repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant interaction between change in NfL and progression of cognitive decline (F [3,44]= 5.2, p=0.032, η²=0.014), confirmed also after age-adjustment (F[3,41]=4.28, p=0.010, η²=0.239, Supplementary table 1.C). Post-hoc analysis showed that this effect was significant between np-SCD and p-MCI (t=-4.32, p<0.001) and between np-MCI and p-MCI (t=-2.93, p=0.033, Figure 4.A). In particular, NfL concentration showed a change of 1.63±2.50 pg/mL (0.81±1.25 pg/mL per year) and of - 1.39±3.88 pg/mL (−0.13±3.24 pg/mL per year) in np-SCD and np-MCI respectively, and an increase of 7.05±8.12 pg/mL (3.52±4.06 pg/mL per year) in p-MCI. The effect of ATN status on NfL change did not reach significance (F[1,31]=2.80, p=0.056, η²=0.023). Nevertheless, when performing a post-hoc analysis considering the ATN groups (A-/T-/N-, A-/TN+, A+, and ATN+), we found a different effect on NfL change between A+ and ATN+ (t=-3.15, p=0.024) (Figure 4.B). In particular, NfL showed a decrease of −1.94±3.32 pg/mL (−0.97±1.66 pg/mL per year) in the A+ group and an increase of 3.07±7.21 pg/mL (1.53±3.60 pg/mL per year) in the ATN+.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 4. Change in logNfL distribution by progression and ATN groups

T1 and T2 indicate the first and second blood collection for plasma NfL measurement.

A. Effect of cognitive decline progression on LogNfL change: F [3, 44] = 5.2, p = 0.032, η²

= 0.014. Post-hoc analysis:

- np-SCD vs. p-SCD (mean difference = −0.18, p = 0.214)

- np-SCD vs. np-MCI (mean difference = −0.13, p = 0.223)

- np-SCD vs. p-MCI (mean difference = −0.34, p < 0.001)

- p-SCD vs. np-MCI (mean difference = 0.05, p = 1.00)

- p-SCD vs. p-MCI (mean difference = −0.16, p = 1.00)

- np-MCI vs. p-MCI (mean difference = −0.21, p = 0.033)

B. Effect of ATN on NfL change: F [1, 31]= 2.80, p = 0.056, η² = 0.213). Post-hoc analysis:

- A-/T-/N- vs. A-/TN+ (mean difference = 0.00, p = 1.00)

- A-/T-/N- vs. A+ (mean difference = 0.05, p = 1.00)

- A-/T-/N- vs. ATN+ (mean difference = −0.18, p = 0.077)

- A-/TN+ vs. A+ (mean difference = 0.05, p = 1.00)

- A-/TN+ vs. ATN+ (mean difference = −0.18, p = 0.269)

- A+ vs. ATN + (mean difference = −0.23, p = 0.024)

3.11. Diagnostic accuracy of NfL change rate in predicting the progression from MCI to AD dementia

We tested the accuracy of NfL change rate (ΔNfL/per year) in distinguishing between np-MCI an p-MCI: a cut-off of 1.64 pg/mL per year showed the highest Youden index, providing very good accuracy (92.86% [95%C.I.=83.32:100], AUC=0.954) with very high sensitivity (100%), specificity (91.30% [C.I.95%=80.87:100]) and NPV (100%) in distinguishing between np-MCI and p-MCI. Also in this case, PPV was fair (71.43% [95%C.I.=54.70:88.16]). We did not perform the same analysis in the SCD group, as the repeated measures ANOVA did not show a significant effect of progression on NfL change in this group.