PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Spina, Salvatore
AU  - Joie, Renaud La
AU  - Petersen, Cathrine
AU  - Nolan, Amber L.
AU  - Cuevas, Deion
AU  - Cosme, Celica
AU  - Hepker, Mackenzie
AU  - Hwang, Ji-Hye
AU  - Miller, Zachary A.
AU  - Huang, Eric J.
AU  - Karydas, Anna M.
AU  - Grant, Harli
AU  - Boxer, Adam L.
AU  - Gorno-Tempini, Maria Luisa
AU  - Rosen, Howard J.
AU  - Kramer, Joel H.
AU  - Miller, Bruce L.
AU  - Seeley, William W.
AU  - Rabinovici, Gil D.
AU  - Grinberg, Lea T.
TI  - Comorbid neuropathological diagnoses in early vs late-onset Alzheimer’s disease
AID  - 10.1101/2020.10.14.20213017
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2020.10.14.20213017
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/20/2020.10.14.20213017.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/20/2020.10.14.20213017.full
AB  - Copathologies play an important role in the expression of the AD clinical phenotype and may influence treatment efficacy. Early-onset AD (EOAD), defined as manifesting before age 65, has been viewed as a relatively pure form of AD with a more homogenous neuropathological substrate. We sought to compare the frequency of common neuropathological diagnoses in a consecutive autopsy series of 96 patients with EOAD (median age of onset = 55 years, 44 females) and 48 with late-onset AD (LOAD) (median age of onset = 73 years, 14 females). The UCSF Neurodegenerative Disease Brain Bank database was reviewed to identify patients with a primary pathological diagnosis of AD. Prevalence and stage of Lewy body disease (LBD), limbic age-related TDP-43 encephalopathy (LATE), argyrophilic grain disease (AGD), hippocampal sclerosis (HS), cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), vascular brain injury (VBI) and aging-related tau astrogliopathy (ARTAG) were compared between the two cohorts. We found at least one non-AD pathological diagnosis in 98% of patients with EOAD (versus 100% of LOAD), and the number of comorbid diagnoses per patient was lower in EOAD than in LOAD (median=2 versus 3, Mann-Whitney Z=3.00, p=0.002). LBD and CAA were common in both EOAD and LOAD (CAA: 86% versus 79%, Fisher exact p=0.33; LBD: 49% versus 42%, p=0.48, respectively), although amygdala-predominant LBD was more commonly found in EOAD than LOAD (22% versus 6%, p=0.02). In contrast, LATE (35% versus 8%, p<0.001), HS (15% versus 3%, p=0.02), AGD (58% versus 41%, p=0.052), and VBI (65% versus 39%, p=0.004) were more common in LOAD than EOAD, respectively. The number of copathologies predicted worse cognitive performance at the time of death on MMSE (1.4 points/pathology (95%CI [−2.5, −0.2]) and Clinical Dementia Rating – Sum of Boxes (1.15 point/pathology, 95%CI [0.45, 1.84]), across the EOAD and the LOAD cohorts. Prevalence of at least one ApoE e4 allele was similar across the two cohorts (52%) and was associated with a greater number of copathologies (+0.42, 95%CI [0.01, 0.82], p=0.04), independent of age of symptom onset. Our findings suggest that non-AD pathological diagnoses play an important role in the clinical phenotype of EOAD with potentially significant implications for clinical practice and clinical trials design.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNational Institute for Health: P30-AG062422 (ADRC), P01-AG019724 (PPG), K99 AG065501 (RLJ), R01 AG045611 (GDR), AG045333 (HR), K08-AG052648 (SS), K08-NS114170 (AN), K24AG053435 (LTG), U01 AG057195 (LTG), U54 NS100717 (LTG).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:University of California San Francisco Institutional Review Board.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 study are available for review upon request.