Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

Welcome to the new AJNR, Updated Hall of Fame, and more. Read the full announcements.


AJNR is seeking candidates for the position of Associate Section Editor, AJNR Case Collection. Read the full announcement.

 

Research ArticleBrain
Open Access

Apolipoprotein E ε4 Does Not Modulate Amyloid-β–Associated Neurodegeneration in Preclinical Alzheimer Disease

R.S. Desikan, L.K. McEvoy, D. Holland, W.K. Thompson, J.B. Brewer, P.S. Aisen, O.A. Andreassen, B.T. Hyman, R.A. Sperling, A.M. Dale and for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
American Journal of Neuroradiology March 2013, 34 (3) 505-510; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3267
R.S. Desikan
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (R.S.D., L.K.E., J.B.B., A.M.D.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L.K. McEvoy
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (R.S.D., L.K.E., J.B.B., A.M.D.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D. Holland
bNeuroscience (D.H., J.B.B., P.S.A., A.M.D.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W.K. Thompson
cPsychiatry (W.K.T., O.A.A.), University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.B. Brewer
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (R.S.D., L.K.E., J.B.B., A.M.D.)
bNeuroscience (D.H., J.B.B., P.S.A., A.M.D.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P.S. Aisen
bNeuroscience (D.H., J.B.B., P.S.A., A.M.D.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
O.A. Andreassen
cPsychiatry (W.K.T., O.A.A.), University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California
dInstitute of Clinical Medicine (O.A.A.), University of Oslo and Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
B.T. Hyman
eDepartment of Neurology (B.T.H., R.A.S.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R.A. Sperling
eDepartment of Neurology (B.T.H., R.A.S.), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
fDepartment of Neurology (R.A.S.), Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A.M. Dale
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (R.S.D., L.K.E., J.B.B., A.M.D.)
bNeuroscience (D.H., J.B.B., P.S.A., A.M.D.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Among cognitively healthy older individuals, the relationship among the 2 hallmark proteins of AD (Aβ and τ APOE ε4) and neurodegeneration is not well-understood. Here, we investigated the relationship between Aβ, p-τ, and APOE ε4 on longitudinal brain atrophy in preclinical AD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 107 cognitively healthy older adults who underwent longitudinal MR imaging and baseline lumbar puncture. Within the same linear mixed-effects model, we concurrently investigated main and interactive effects between the APOE ε4 genotype and CSF Aβ1–42, CSF p-τ and CSF Aβ1–42, and the APOE ε4 genotype and CSF p-τ on entorhinal cortex atrophy rate. We also examined the relationship of APOE ε4, CSF p-τ, and CSF Aβ1–42 on the atrophy rate of other AD-vulnerable neuroanatomic regions.

RESULTS: The full model with main and interactive effects demonstrated a significant interaction only between CSF p-τ and CSF Aβ1–42 on entorhinal cortex atrophy rate, indicating elevated atrophy with time in individuals with increased CSF p-τ and decreased CSF Aβ1–42. The APOE ε4 genotype was significantly and specifically associated with CSF Aβ1–42. However, the interaction between the APOE ε4 genotype and either CSF Aβ1–42 or CSF p-τ on entorhinal cortex atrophy rate was not significant. We found similar results in other AD-vulnerable regions.

CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of our findings and building on prior experimental evidence, we propose a model of the pathogenic cascade underlying preclinical AD in which APOE ε4 primarily influences the pathology of Alzheimer disease via Aβ-related mechanisms, and in turn, Aβ-associated neurodegeneration occurs only in the presence of p-τ.

ABBREVIATIONS:

Aβ
amyloid-β
AD
Alzheimer disease
APOE ε4
ε4 allele of apolipoprotein E
HC
healthy controls
p-τ
phospho-τ181p
SE
standard error of the mean

Converging biochemical, molecular, and genetic evidence indicates that Aβ plays a central role in the neurodegenerative process underlying AD.1 The presence of Aβ initiates loss of dendritic spines and synapses2 and contributes to the dysfunction of neuronal networks.3 Reports based on mouse models suggest that multiple factors influence Aβ-associated toxicity. The ε4 allele of APOE ε4, the most important genetic risk factor for late-onset AD,4 accelerates the onset of Aβ deposition into plaques5 and decreases the transport of Aβ across the blood-brain barrier.6 Reductions in τ, another hallmark protein of AD pathology, protect against Aβ-induced neuronal dysfunction,7 while the presence of τ potentiates Aβ-associated synapotoxicity.8

In humans, evidence from genetic-at-risk cohorts and neuropathologic findings in clinically healthy older individuals suggest that the pathobiologic process underlying AD begins years before the onset of cognitive deficits or dementia symptoms.9 Biomarker studies in cognitively asymptomatic older adults have demonstrated significant relationships between structural MR imaging measures of brain atrophy and CSF Aβ levels,10⇓–12 enabling identification of clinically healthy individuals who may be in a presymptomatic or preclinical stage of AD.13

Recent evidence from our laboratory indicates that in clinically healthy older individuals and those with mild cognitive impairment, Aβ-associated volume loss occurs only in the presence of p-τ.14 However, it is unknown whether APOE ε4 and CSF p-τ concurrently modulate the effect of CSF Aβ on longitudinal brain atrophy in preclinical AD. In this study, we investigated whether concurrent interactions between decreased CSF Aβ1–42 and APOE ε4 and between decreased CSF Aβ1–42 and increased CSF p-τ are associated with increased brain atrophy in cognitively healthy older individuals.

Materials and Methods

Selection of participants and analysis methods for MR imaging and CSF biomarkers are briefly summarized here, with details provided in the On-line Appendix.

We evaluated participants who were clinically diagnosed at baseline as cognitively and clinically healthy controls (global Clinical Dementia Rating = 0) from the Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. A total of 115 cognitively healthy older individuals had undergone longitudinal MR imaging, CSF lumbar puncture, and APOE ε4 genotyping. Of these individuals, we restricted our analyses to those participants (n = 107) with quality-assured baseline and at least 1 follow-up MR imaging (6 months to 3.5 years; 10% with 6-month follow-up, 15% with 12-month follow-up, 34% with 23-month follow-up, and 41% with 36-month follow-up) available as of December 2011. We classified all participants on the basis of the presence (“carriers”) and absence (“noncarriers”) of at least 1 APOE ε4 allele (Tables 1 and 2). Using recently proposed CSF cutoffs,15 we also classified all participants on the basis of high (>23 pg/mL, “positive”) and low (<23 pg/mL, “negative”) p-τ levels, and on low (<192 pg/mL, “positive”) and high (>192 pg/mL, “negative”) Aβ1–42 levels (Tables 1 and 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

Demographic, clinical, and imaging data for all older HC in this study, as assessed by P-τ and Aβ status

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Demographic, clinical, and imaging data for all older HC in this study, as assessed by APOE ε4 and Aβ status

We examined 417 T1-weighted MR images. We performed quantitative surface-based analysis of all MR images by using an automated region-of-interest labeling technique16 and primarily focused on entorhinal cortex, a medial temporal lobe region that is selectively affected in the earliest stages of AD.17⇓⇓–20 To additionally investigate neuroanatomic regions that are involved in the later stages of the disease process17,18 and to minimize multiple comparisons, we averaged longitudinal volume change in the temporal pole, parahippocampal gyrus, inferior temporal gyrus, banks of the superior temporal sulcus, inferior parietal lobule, amygdala, and hippocampus to create an “AD-vulnerable” region of interest (Fig 1). Using an automated method developed in our laboratory,21 we assessed longitudinal subregional change in gray matter volume (atrophy) on serial MR images.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

3D representations of the neuroanatomic regions examined in the current study (only 1 hemisphere is shown). All of the neocortical regions are visible in the lateral (A) and medial (B) views of the gray matter surface, and the 2 non-neocortical regions (ie, the hippocampus and amygdala, C) are visible in the coronal view of a T1-weighted MR image. Regions illustrated in red constitute the AD-vulnerable region of interest (for further details please see text).

We asked whether p-τ and APOE ε4 independently influence Aβ-associated neurodegeneration. To investigate this question, we examined the main and interactive effects of CSF Aβ1–42 and APOE ε4, and CSF Aβ1–42 and CSF p-τ on entorhinal cortex atrophy rate in a mixed-effects model, covarying for the effects of age and sex, specifically Embedded Image Here, Δv is entorhinal cortex atrophy (millimeters) and Δt is the change in time from baseline MR imaging (in years). Using the same linear mixed-effects framework, we also investigated the main and interactive effects of CSF Aβ1–42 and APOE ε4, and CSF Aβ1–42 and CSF p-τ on the atrophy rate in the AD-vulnerable region of interest.

Results

Results from the full model with both interactive terms showed that the interaction between CSF Aβ1–42 and CSF p-τ status on entorhinal cortex atrophy rate was significant (β5 = −0.39, SE = 0.14, P = .005), indicating elevated atrophy with time in individuals with positive CSF p-τ and positive CSF Aβ1–42 status (Fig 2A) as previously reported.14 In contrast, the interaction between CSF Aβ1–42 and APOE ε4 on entorhinal cortex atrophy rate was not significant (β4 = −0.17, SE = 0.18, P = .35). With both interaction terms in the model, the main effects of APOE ε4, CSF Aβ1–42 status, and CSF p-τ status were not significant. Follow-up analyses demonstrated that positive CSF Aβ1–42 status was associated with an elevated entorhinal cortex atrophy rate only among CSF p-τ–positive individuals (β-coefficient = −0.32, SE = 0.11, P = .008). There was no association between positive CSF Aβ1–42 status and entorhinal cortex atrophy rate among CSF p-τ–negative individuals (β-coefficient = 0.10, SE = 0.08, P = .23) (Fig 2A). There was no association between positive CSF Aβ1–42 status and entorhinal cortex atrophy rate either among APOE ε4 carriers (β-coefficient = −0.11, SE = 0.19, P = .58) or noncarriers (β-coefficient = −0.02, SE = 0.08, P = .76) (Fig 2B).

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Box-and-whisker plots for all healthy control participants illustrating entorhinal cortex atrophy rate, measured as annualized percentage change (APC) based on CSF p-τ and CSF Aβ status (A) and ε4 genotype and CSF Aβ status (B). For each plot, thick black lines show the median value. Regions above and below the black line show the upper and lower quartiles, respectively. The dashed lines extend to the minimum and maximum values with outliers shown as open circles. As illustrated in A, the pτ+/Aβ+ HC demonstrate the largest cortical atrophy rate (ie, more negative percentage change). In comparison as noted in B, the ε4+/Aβ+ HC show equivalent rates of atrophy compared with the other groups.

Similar results were obtained when examining the association of CSF protein and APOE ε4 status on the atrophy rate in the AD-vulnerable region of interest: The interaction of CSF Aβ1–42 and CSF p-τ status on the AD-vulnerable region-of-interest atrophy rate was significant (β-coefficient = −0.34, SE = 0.11, P = .002), but the interaction of CSF Aβ1–42 and APOE ε4 was not (β-coefficient = −0.15, SE = 0.14, P = .28). None of the main effects of APOE ε4, CSF Aβ1–42 status, and CSF p-τ were significant with both interaction terms in the model. Follow-up analyses demonstrated that positive CSF Aβ1–42 status was associated with an elevated AD-vulnerable region-of-interest atrophy rate among CSF p-τ–positive individuals (β-coefficient = −0.30, SE = 0.09, P = .001) but not among CSF p-τ–negative individuals (β-coefficient = 0.03, SE = 0.07, P = .61). There was no association between positive CSF Aβ1–42 status and atrophy rate in the AD-vulnerable region of interest either in APOE ε4 carriers (β-coefficient = −0.19, SE = 0.13, P = .09) or noncarriers (β-coefficient = −0.06, SE = 0.07, P = .38).

We also examined the possibility that APOE ε4 modulates AD-associated neurodegeneration via p-τ–related mechanisms. Using the same linear mixed-effects model framework described above, we concurrently examined the main and interactive effects of APOE ε4 and CSF p-τ, CSF Aβ1–42 and APOE ε4, and CSF Aβ1–42 and CSF p-τ on the atrophy rate of entorhinal cortex and the AD-vulnerable region of interest. We did not find a significant interaction between APOE ε4 and CSF p-τ either on the atrophy rate of entorhinal cortex (β-coefficient = −0.04, SE = 0.18, P = .78) or the AD-vulnerable region of interest (β-coefficient = 0.19, SE = 0.15, P = .18). Most important, even within this triple interaction model, the only significant effect was the interaction between CSF Aβ1–42 and CSF p-τ on the atrophy rate of entorhinal cortex (β-coefficient = −0.38, SE = 0.15, P = .01) and the AD-vulnerable region of interest (β-coefficient = −0.41, SE = 0.12, P = .001).

Finally, although our results did not demonstrate a significant interaction between APOE ε4 and CSF Aβ1–42 on longitudinal brain atrophy among HC, we examined whether the presence of APOE ε4 is associated with decreased CSF Aβ1–42 and increased CSF p-τ by using a generalized linear model, covarying for age and sex, specifically Embedded Image We found a significant relationship between APOE ε4 status and positive CSF Aβ1–42 status (β-coefficient = 0.40, SE = 0.07, P = 4.82 × 10−7), indicating increased Aβ deposition in ε4 carriers. In contrast, there was no relationship between APOE ε4 carriers and positive CSF p-τ status (β-coefficient = 0.05, SE = 0.09, P = .55).

Discussion

In this study, we show that in cognitively healthy older individuals, though the presence of the ε4 allele is specifically associated with Aβ deposition, APOE ε4 does not affect Aβ-associated volume loss. In contrast, we found that p-τ modulates Aβ-associated neurodegeneration in clinically healthy individuals, as previously reported.14 These findings, in conjunction with recent experimental observations,22,23 support a conceptual model of the pathogenic cascade underlying preclinical AD (Fig 3), in which APOE ε4 primarily influences Alzheimer pathology via Aβ-related mechanisms; and in turn, Aβ-associated neurodegeneration occurs only in the presence of p-τ. This model provides a representation of the disease process that can be assessed with currently validated biomarkers, not a comprehensive framework of all pathologic processes occurring in the earliest stages of AD. As such, it can be expanded to include future findings such as mechanistic details regarding the effect of genetic susceptibility loci on AD-associated neurodegeneration.

Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

A conceptual model of AD-associated neurodegeneration in the preclinical phase of the disease process based on data from our mixed-effects models (please see text for details). The thickness of the arrows illustrates the magnitude of effect. The circle with a dot inside illustrates an interactive effect, the plus sign illustrates a positive effect, and X illustrates no significant effect.

These findings provide important insights into the preclinical stage of AD. Although several studies in cognitively asymptomatic older individuals have demonstrated a significant relationship among APOE ε4 genotype, Aβ deposition, and neurodegeneration,10⇓–12,24⇓–26 there has been limited evaluation of the role of p-τ in modulating these relationships. Our findings indicate that in clinically healthy older individuals, Aβ deposition by itself, either in ε4 carriers or noncarriers, is not associated with volume loss; the presence of p-τ represents a critical link among the APOE ε4 genotype, Aβ deposition, and neurodegeneration. Consistent with prior reports,27,28 our results illustrate that the ε4 allele primarily affects AD in an indirect fashion via Aβ. In contrast, these findings do not support a role for APOE ε4 either in affecting intracranial p-τ levels or modulating AD pathology via p-τ–related mechanisms.

From a quantitative neuroimaging perspective, our results demonstrate the feasibility of using automated MR imaging–based measures of longitudinal brain atrophy as an in vivo biomarker even at the preclinical stage of the disease process. Building on prior neuroimaging studies in cognitively healthy older adults,10⇓–12,24⇓–26 these findings indicate that volume loss can be detected in older individuals testing positive for both Aβ and p-τ. Furthermore, the pattern of atrophy detected in this study is consistent with previous neuropathologic studies demonstrating neuronal loss within entorhinal cortex in the earliest stages of AD.19,20 Taken together, these findings suggest that the regionally specific volume loss occurring in a subset of cognitively healthy older adults is neuropathologically consistent with early AD.

This study has limitations. One concern is that CSF biomarkers provide an indirect assessment of amyloid and neurofibrillary pathology and may not fully reflect the pathologic processes underlying Alzheimer disease. Another limitation is that we primarily focused on the APOE ε4 genotype and CSF biomarkers of the 2 pathologic hallmarks of AD. Additional genetic and cellular markers may also interact with Aβ to predict neurodegeneration in cognitively healthy elders. Finally, the individuals examined here may represent a group of highly selected, generally healthy older adults who are motivated to participate in research studies. These findings therefore need to be further validated on an independent community-based cohort of older individuals who would be more representative of the general older population.

Clinically, these results indicate that a biomarker profile evaluating both Aβ and p-τ may better identify those older individuals who are at an elevated risk of progressing to eventual dementia than either biomarker by itself. Consistent with prior clinical observations from our laboratory,29 our current findings suggest that early intervention trials should take into account both the p-τ and Aβ status of participants because older individuals with increased CSF p-τ and decreased CSF Aβ1–42 levels are likely to have significantly elevated rates of volume loss compared with individuals with normal CSF p-τ and decreased CSF Aβ1–42 levels. Finally, in addition to the current emphasis on Aβ, our findings identify the need for developing novel therapies that target APOE- and τ-related processes. It is likely that a complex interplay between multiple genetic and molecular entities determines AD pathogenesis.30,31 As such, targeting “upstream” events such as neuronal lipids and cholesterol transporters that interact with APOE in ε4 carriers with normal AD biomarker levels as well as “downstream” events such as τ phosphorylation and aggregation in older individuals with both decreased CSF Aβ1–42 and increased CSF p-τ levels may represent additionally beneficial treatment strategies.

Conclusions

We show that in cognitively healthy older individuals, p-τ modulates the effect of Aβ on neurodegeneration. In contrast, although the presence of the ε4 allele is specifically associated with Aβ deposition, APOE ε4 does not influence Aβ-associated volume loss. These findings provide important insights into the pathogenic cascade underlying preclinical AD and illustrate the importance of examining both Aβ and p-τ in secondary prevention trials.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Drs William Bradley and John Hesselink for helpful input on this article.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Rahul S. Desikan—RELATED: Other: American Society of Neuroradiology Cornelius Dyke Award. Linda K. McEvoy—RELATED: Grant: NIH,* Comments: My efforts in this manuscript were supported by grants from the National Institute on Aging, grant numbers R01AG031224, K01AG029218; spouse is CEO of Cortechs Labs, Inc. Dominic Holland—OTHER RELATIONSHIPS: patent pending for quantitative anatomic regional change methodology, filed through University of California at San Diego technology-transfer office; coinventors D.H. and D.M.A. James B. Brewer—UNRELATED: Board Membership: Lilly Biomarker Business Unit, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Comments: Advising on the use of imaging in Alzheimer clinical trials and clinical practice, Grants/Grants Pending: General Electric Medical Foundation,* Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy, Stock/Stock Options: Cortechs Labs Inc. Paul S. Aisen—RELATED: NIH;* UNRELATED: Consultancy: Elan Corporation, Wyeth, Eisai Inc, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, NeuroPhage, Merck & Co, Roche, Amgen, Abbott, Pfizer Inc, Novartis, Bayer, Astellas, Dainippon, Biomarin, Solvay, Otsuka, Daiichi, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Medivation Inc, Theravance, Cardeus, Anavex, Grants/Grants Pending: research grants from NIH,* Foundation for the National Institutes of Health,* Alzheimer's Association,* Baxter,* Pfizer,* Lilly.* Ole A. Andreassen—RELATED: Grant: Research Council of Norway,* Comments: travel expenses for and support for sabbatical at University of California at San Diego, UNRELATED: Other: pharmaceutical companies, Comments: I have received honoraria for lectures from pharmaceutical companies involved in medication for psychiatric disorders (Lundbeck, Lilly, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, MSD). Some of these companies may have medication for Alzheimer disease, but I am not aware of it. Bradley T. Hyman—RELATED: NIH grant to the Alzheimer Disease Research Center.* Reisa A. Sperling—RELATED: Grant: Regents of the University of California, San Diego,* Comments: 4-ADNI-PIB/ADC-029 (“PET Imaging of Brain Amyloid”), UNRELATED: Consultancy: Bayer,* Bristol-Myers-Squibb,* Eisai,* Janssen,* Kyowa Hakko Kirin,* Pfizer,* Roche,* Satori,* Avid, Comments: Avid is unpaid, Grants/Grants Pending: NIH.* Anders Dale—RELATED: NIH/National Institute on Aging,* Comments: grant No. R01AG031224, UNRELATED: Grants/Grants Pending: NIH,* Patents (planned, pending, or issued): University of California at San Diego,* Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School,* Comments: I am an inventor of multiple pending and issued patents on MRI acquisition and analysis methods, filed through University of California at San Diego or Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Stock/Stock Options: Cortechs Labs Inc, Comments: I am a founder and equity holder of Cortechs Labs, Inc and also serve on its Scientific Advisory Board. The terms of this arrangement have been reviewed and approved by the University of California, San Diego, in accordance with its conflict-of-interest policies, Other: GE Healthcare,* Comments: I am also the Principal Investigator of a research agreement between GE Healthcare and University of California at San Diego. *Money paid to the institution.

  • This research was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (R01AG031224, K01AG029218, K02 NS067427, T32 EB005970). Data collection and sharing for this project were funded by the Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (National Institutes of Health Grant U01 AG024904). ADNI is funded by the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, and through generous contributions from the following: Abbott, Alzheimer's Association, Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation, Amorfix Life Sciences Ltd, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare, BioClinica Inc, Biogen Idec Inc, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Eisai Inc, Elan Pharmaceuticals Inc, Eli Lilly and Company, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and its affiliated company Genentech Inc, GE Healthcare, Innogenetics, N.V., IXICO Ltd, Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research & Development LLC, Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development LLC, Medpace Inc, Merck & Co Inc, Meso Scale Diagnostics LLC, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Pfizer Inc, Servier, Synarc Inc, and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company. 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 Disease Cooperative Study at the University of California, San Diego. ADNI data are disseminated by the Laboratory for Neuro Imaging at the University of California, Los Angeles. This research was also supported by National Institutes of Health grants P30 AG010129 and K01 AG030514.

  • Data used in preparation of this article were obtained from the ADNI data base (http://adni.loni.ucla.edu). As such, the investigators within the ADNI contributed to the design and implementation of ADNI and/or provided data but did not participate in the analysis or writing of this report. A complete listing of ADNI investigators can be found at: http://adni.loni.ucla.edu/wpcontent/uploads/how_to_apply/ADNI_Acknowledgement_List.pdf.

  • Rahul S. Desikan received the 2012 Cornelius G. Dyke Memorial Award, given to a trainee or junior faculty member in neuroradiology for excellence as demonstrated in a paper, which represents original unpublished research in some aspect of neuroradiology.

Indicates open access to non-subscribers at www.ajnr.org

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Selkoe DJ
    . Resolving controversies on the path to Alzheimer's therapeutics. Nat Med 2011;17:1060–65
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Spires-Jones TL,
    2. Meyer-Luehmann M,
    3. Osetek JD,
    4. et al
    . Impaired spine stability underlies plaque-related spine loss in an Alzheimer's disease mouse model. Am J Pathol 2007;171:1304–11
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Kuchibhotla KV,
    2. Goldman ST,
    3. Lattarulo CR,
    4. et al
    . Abeta plaques lead to aberrant regulation of calcium homeostasis in vivo resulting in structural and functional disruption of neuronal networks. Neuron 2008;59:214–25
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Farrer LA,
    2. Cupples LA,
    3. Haines JL,
    4. et al
    . Effects of age, sex, and ethnicity on the association between apolipoprotein E genotype and Alzheimer disease: a meta-analysis—APOE and Alzheimer Disease Meta Analysis Consortium. JAMA 1997;278:1349–56
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Holtzman DM,
    2. Bales KR,
    3. Tenkova T,
    4. et al
    . Apolipoprotein E isoform-dependent amyloid deposition and neuritic degeneration in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000;97:2892–97
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Deane R,
    2. Sagare A,
    3. Hamm K,
    4. et al
    . apoE isoform-specific disruption of amyloid beta peptide clearance from mouse brain. J Clin Invest 2008;118:4002–13
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Roberson ED,
    2. Scearce-Levie K,
    3. Palop JJ,
    4. et al
    . Reducing endogenous tau ameliorates amyloid beta-induced deficits in an Alzheimer's disease mouse model. Science 2007;316:750–54
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Ittner LM,
    2. Ke YD,
    3. Delerue F,
    4. et al
    . Dendritic function of tau mediates amyloid-beta toxicity in Alzheimer's disease mouse models. Cell 2010;142:387–97
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Morris JC
    . Early-stage and preclinical Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2005;19:163–65
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Storandt M,
    2. Mintun MA,
    3. Head D,
    4. et al
    . Cognitive decline and brain volume loss as signatures of cerebral amyloid-beta peptide deposition identified with Pittsburgh compound B: cognitive decline associated with Abeta deposition. Arch Neurol 2009;66:1476–81
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Ewers M,
    2. Insel P,
    3. Jagust WJ,
    4. et al
    . CSF biomarker and PIB-PET-derived beta-amyloid signature predicts metabolic, gray matter, and cognitive changes in nondemented subjects. Cereb Cortex 2012;22:1993–2004
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Chételat G,
    2. Villemagne VL,
    3. Villain N,
    4. et al
    . Accelerated cortical atrophy in cognitively normal elderly with high β-amyloid deposition. Neurology 2012;78:477–84
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Sperling RA,
    2. Aisen PS,
    3. Beckett LA,
    4. et al
    . Toward defining the preclinical stages of Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement 2011;7:280–92
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Desikan RS,
    2. McEvoy LK,
    3. Thompson W,
    4. et al
    . Amyloid-β associated volume loss occurs only in the presence of phospho-tau. Ann Neurol 2011;70:657–61
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Shaw LM,
    2. Vanderstichele H,
    3. Knapik-Czajka M,
    4. et al
    . Cerebrospinal fluid biomarker signature in Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative subjects. Ann Neurol 2009;65:403–13
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Desikan RS,
    2. Ségonne F,
    3. Fischl B,
    4. et al
    . An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest. Neuroimage 2006;31:968–80
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Braak H,
    2. Braak E
    . Neuropathological stageing of Alzheimer-related changes. Acta Neuropathol 1991;82:239–59
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Arnold SE,
    2. Hyman BT,
    3. Flory J,
    4. et al
    . The topographical and neuroanatomical distribution of neurofibrillary tangles and neuritic plaques in the cerebral cortex of patients with Alzheimer's disease. Cereb Cortex 1991;1:103–16
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Gómez-Isla T,
    2. Price JL,
    3. McKeel DW Jr.,
    4. et al
    . Profound loss of layer II entorhinal cortex neurons occurs in very mild Alzheimer's disease. J Neurosci 1996;16:4491–500
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Kordower JH,
    2. Chu Y,
    3. Stebbins GT,
    4. et al
    . Loss and atrophy of layer II entorhinal cortex neurons in elderly people with mild cognitive impairment. Ann Neurol 2001;49:202–13
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Holland D,
    2. Dale AM
    . Nonlinear registration of longitudinal images and measurement of change in regions of interest. Med Image Anal 2011;15:489–97
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Ittner LM,
    2. Gotz J
    . Amyloid-β and tau: a toxic pas de deux in Alzheimer's disease. Nat Rev Neurosci 2011;12:65–72
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Kim J,
    2. Basak JM,
    3. Holtzman DM
    . The role of apolipoprotein E in Alzheimer's disease. Neuron 2009;64:632–44
    CrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Schott JM,
    2. Bartlett JW,
    3. Fox NC,
    4. et al
    . Increased brain atrophy rates in cognitively normal older adults with low cerebrospinal fluid Aβ1–42. Ann Neurol 2010;68:825–34
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Becker JA,
    2. Hedden T,
    3. Carmasin J,
    4. et al
    . Amyloid-β associated cortical thinning in clinically normal elderly. Ann Neurol 2011;69:1032–42
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Kantarci K,
    2. Lowe V,
    3. Przybelski SA,
    4. et al
    . APOE modifies the association between Aβ load and cognition in cognitively normal older adults. Neurology 2012;78:232–40
    CrossRef
  27. 27.↵
    1. Sunderland T,
    2. Mirza N,
    3. Putnam KT,
    4. et al
    . Cerebrospinal fluid beta-amyloid1–42 and tau in control subjects at risk for Alzheimer's disease: the effect of APOE epsilon4 allele. Biol Psychiatry 2004;56:670–76
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Morris JC,
    2. Roe CM,
    3. Xiong C,
    4. et al
    . APOE predicts amyloid-beta but not tau Alzheimer pathology in cognitively normal aging. Ann Neurol 2010;67:122–31
    CrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Desikan RS,
    2. McEvoy LK,
    3. Thompson WK,
    4. et al
    . Amyloid-β-associated clinical decline occurs only in the presence of elevated p-tau. Arch Neurol 2012;69:709–13
    CrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Holtzman DM,
    2. Morris JC,
    3. Goate AM
    . Alzheimer's disease: the challenge of the second century. Sci Transl Med 2011;3:77sr1
    FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Hyman BT
    . Amyloid-dependent and amyloid-independent stages of Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol 2011;68:1062–64
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received May 12, 2012.
  • Accepted after revision June 11, 2012.
  • © 2013 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 34 (3)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 34, Issue 3
1 Mar 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Apolipoprotein E ε4 Does Not Modulate Amyloid-β–Associated Neurodegeneration in Preclinical Alzheimer Disease
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
R.S. Desikan, L.K. McEvoy, D. Holland, W.K. Thompson, J.B. Brewer, P.S. Aisen, O.A. Andreassen, B.T. Hyman, R.A. Sperling, A.M. Dale, for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
Apolipoprotein E ε4 Does Not Modulate Amyloid-β–Associated Neurodegeneration in Preclinical Alzheimer Disease
American Journal of Neuroradiology Mar 2013, 34 (3) 505-510; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3267

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Apolipoprotein E ε4 Does Not Modulate Amyloid-β–Associated Neurodegeneration in Preclinical Alzheimer Disease
R.S. Desikan, L.K. McEvoy, D. Holland, W.K. Thompson, J.B. Brewer, P.S. Aisen, O.A. Andreassen, B.T. Hyman, R.A. Sperling, A.M. Dale, for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
American Journal of Neuroradiology Mar 2013, 34 (3) 505-510; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3267
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref (14)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • Preclinical Alzheimer&#039;s disease and its outcome: a longitudinal cohort study
    Stephanie JB Vos, Chengjie Xiong, Pieter Jelle Visser, Mateusz S Jasielec, Jason Hassenstab, Elizabeth A Grant, Nigel J Cairns, John C Morris, David M Holtzman, Anne M Fagan
    The Lancet Neurology 2013 12 10
  • Genetic overlap between Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease at the MAPT locus
    R S Desikan, A J Schork, Y Wang, A Witoelar, M Sharma, L K McEvoy, D Holland, J B Brewer, C-H Chen, W K Thompson, D Harold, J Williams, M J Owen, M C O'Donovan, M A Pericak-Vance, R Mayeux, J L Haines, L A Farrer, G D Schellenberg, P Heutink, A B Singleton, A Brice, N W Wood, J Hardy, M Martinez, S H Choi, A DeStefano, M A Ikram, J C Bis, A Smith, A L Fitzpatrick, L Launer, C van Duijn, S Seshadri, I D Ulstein, D Aarsland, T Fladby, S Djurovic, B T Hyman, J Snaedal, H Stefansson, K Stefansson, T Gasser, O A Andreassen, A M Dale
    Molecular Psychiatry 2015 20 12
  • Cerebrospinal fluid β‐amyloid and phospho‐tau biomarker interactions affecting brain structure in preclinical Alzheimer disease
    Juan Fortea, Eduard Vilaplana, Daniel Alcolea, María Carmona‐Iragui, María‐Belén Sánchez‐Saudinos, Isabel Sala, Sofía Antón‐Aguirre, Sofía González, Santiago Medrano, Jordi Pegueroles, Estrella Morenas, Jordi Clarimón, Rafael Blesa, Alberto Lleó
    Annals of Neurology 2014 76 2
  • Meta-Review of CSF Core Biomarkers in Alzheimer’s Disease: The State-of-the-Art after the New Revised Diagnostic Criteria
    Daniel Ferreira, Lilisbeth Perestelo-Pérez, Eric Westman, Lars-Olof Wahlund, Antonio Sarría, Pedro Serrano-Aguilar
    Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience 2014 6
  • APOE-related biomarker profiles in non-pathological aging and early phases of Alzheimer&#039;s disease
    Ivar Reinvang, Thomas Espeseth, Lars Tjelta Westlye
    Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2013 37 8
  • Structural neuroimaging in preclinical dementia: From microstructural deficits and grey matter atrophy to macroscale connectomic changes
    Elijah Mak, Silvy Gabel, Habib Mirette, Li Su, Guy B Williams, Adam Waldman, Katie Wells, Karen Ritchie, Craig Ritchie, John O’Brien
    Ageing Research Reviews 2017 35
  • Heart fatty acid binding protein and Aβ-associated Alzheimer’s neurodegeneration
    Rahul S Desikan, Wesley K Thompson, Dominic Holland, Christopher P Hess, James B Brewer, Henrik Zetterberg, Kaj Blennow, Ole A Andreassen, Linda K McEvoy, Bradley T Hyman, Anders M Dale
    Molecular Neurodegeneration 2013 8 1
  • Nonlinear cerebral atrophy patterns across the Alzheimer&#039;s disease continuum: impact of APOE4 genotype
    J.D. Gispert, L. Rami, G. Sánchez-Benavides, C. Falcon, A. Tucholka, S. Rojas, J.L. Molinuevo
    Neurobiology of Aging 2015 36 10
  • Neuroimaging biomarkers for Alzheimer&#039;s disease in asymptomatic APOE4 carriers
    G. Chételat, M. Fouquet
    Revue Neurologique 2013 169 10
  • Nonlinear Distributional Mapping (NoDiM) for harmonization across amyloid-PET radiotracers
    Michael J. Properzi, Rachel F. Buckley, Jasmeer P. Chhatwal, Michael C. Donohue, Cristina Lois, Elizabeth C. Mormino, Keith A. Johnson, Reisa A. Sperling, Aaron P. Schultz
    NeuroImage 2019 186

More in this TOC Section

  • Statin Therapy Does Not Affect the Radiographic and Clinical Profile of Patients with TIA and Minor Stroke
  • Optimal MRI Sequence for Identifying Occlusion Location in Acute Stroke: Which Value of Time-Resolved Contrast-Enhanced MRA?
  • SWI or T2*: Which MRI Sequence to Use in the Detection of Cerebral Microbleeds? The Karolinska Imaging Dementia Study
Show more Brain

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editors Choice
  • Fellow Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • Special Collections

Resources

  • News and Updates
  • Turn around Times
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Policies
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Submit a Case
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcast
  • AJNR SCANtastic
  • Video Articles

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Advertise with us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Permissions
  • Terms and Conditions

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire