PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Earnest, Tom
AU  - Yang, Braden
AU  - Kothapalli, Deydeep
AU  - Sotiras, Aristeidis
AU - the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
TI  - Comprehensive evaluation of AT(N) imaging biomarkers for predicting cognition
AID  - 10.1101/2024.11.25.24317943
DP  - 2024 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2024.11.25.24317943
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/11/27/2024.11.25.24317943.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/11/27/2024.11.25.24317943.full
AB  - Background and Objectives Imaging biomarkers enable in vivo quantification of amyloid, tau, and neurogenerative pathologies that develop in Alzheimer’s Disease (AD). Interest in imaging biomarkers has led to a wide variety of biomarker definitions, some of which potentially offer less predictive value than others. We aimed to assess how different operationalizations of AD imaging biomarkers affect prediction of cognition.Methods We included individuals from ADNI who underwent amyloid-PET ([18F]-Florbetapir), tau-PET ([18F]-Flortaucipir), and volumetric MRI imaging. We compiled a large collection of imaging biomarker definitions (42 in total) spanning different pathologies (amyloid, tau, neurodegeneration) and variable types (continuous, binary, non-binary categorical). Using cross-validation, we trained regression models to predict neuropsychological performance, both globally and across different subdomains (Phenotype Harmonization Consortium composites), using different combinations of biomarkers. We also compared these biomarker models to support vector machines (SVMs) trained to predict cognition directly from imaging regions of interest. In a subsample of individuals with CSF biomarker readouts, we repeated experiments comparing the accuracy of models using imaging and fluid biomarkers. Additional analyses tested the predictive strength of imaging biomarkers when limited to specific clinical stages of disease (cognitive unimpaired vs. impaired) and when modeling longitudinal cognitive change.Results Our sample included 490 people (247 female) with a mix of no impairment (n=288), mild impairment (n=163), and dementia (n=39). While almost all biomarkers tested were predictive of cognitive performance, we observed substantial variability in accuracy, even for measures of the same pathology. Tau biomarkers were the single most accurate single predictors, though combination of biomarkers spanning multiple pathologies were more accurate overall. SVM models were generally more accurate than models using traditional biomarkers. Incorporating continuous or non-binary categorical biomarkers was beneficial only for tau and neurodegeneration, but not amyloid. Patterns of results were largely consistent when considering different clinical stages of disease, neuropsychological domains, and longitudinal cognition. In the CSF subsample (n=246), imaging biomarkers strongly outperformed CSF versions for cognitive prediction.Discussion We demonstrated that different imaging biomarker definitions can lead to variability in downstream predictive tasks. Researchers should consider how their biomarker operationalizations may help or hinder the assessment of disease severity.Competing Interest StatementAuthor AS has equity in TheraPanacea and have received personal compensation for serving as grant reviewer for BrightFocus Foundation. The remaining authors have no conflicting interests to report.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R01-AG067103) and the BrightFocus Foundation (ADR A2021042S). Data collection and sharing for this project was funded by the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (National Institutes of Health Grant U01 AG024904) and DOD ADNI (Department of Defense award number W81XWH-12-2-0012). ADNI is funded by the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, and through generous contributions from the following: AbbVie, Alzheimer's Association; Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation; Araclon Biotech; BioClinica, Inc.; Biogen; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; CereSpir, Inc.; Cogstate; Eisai Inc.; Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Eli Lilly and Company; EuroImmun; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and its affiliated company Genentech, Inc.; Fujirebio; GE Healthcare; IXICO Ltd.; Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research & Development, LLC.; Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development LLC.; Lumosity; Lundbeck; Merck & Co., Inc.; Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC.; NeuroRx Research; Neurotrack Technologies; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Pfizer Inc.; Piramal Imaging; Servier; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company; and Transition Therapeutics. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research is providing funds to support ADNI clinical sites in Canada. Private sector contributions are facilitated by the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (www.fnih.org). The grantee organization is the Northern California Institute for Research and Education, and the study is coordinated by the Alzheimer's Therapeutic Research Institute at the University of Southern California. ADNI data are disseminated by the Laboratory for Neuro Imaging at the University of Southern California.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:Data used in the preparation of this article were obtained from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database (adni.loni.usc.edu). The ADNI was launched in 2003 as a public-private partnership, led by Principal Investigator Michael W. Weiner, MD. The primary goal of ADNI has been to test whether serial MRI, PET, other biological markers, and clinical and neuropsychological assessment can be combined to measure the progression of MCI and early AD. For up-to-date information, see www.adni-info.org. All participants provided informed written consent for participating in ADNI. Study protocols were approved by site-specific institutional review and ethical boards.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data used in this study are accessible from ADNI following formal data usage agreements (https://adni.loni.usc.edu/). All code for this project will be shared at the following repository: https://github.com/sotiraslab/earnest_ad_biomarker_modeling. https://adni.loni.usc.edu/ https://github.com/sotiraslab/earnest_ad_biomarker_modeling