Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders and Brain and Body Donation Program.

The Brain and Body Donation Program (BBDP) at Banner Sun Health Research Institute (http://www.brainandbodydonationprogram.org) started in 1987 with brain-only donations and currently has banked more than 1600 brains. More than 430 whole-body donations have been received since this service was commenced in 2005. The collective academic output of the BBDP is now described as the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders (AZSAND). Most BBDP subjects are enrolled as cognitively normal volunteers residing in the retirement communities of metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona. Specific recruitment efforts are also directed at subjects with Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and cancer. The median age at death is 82. Subjects receive standardized general medical, neurological, neuropsychological and movement disorders assessments during life and more than 90% receive full pathological examinations by medically licensed pathologists after death. The Program has been funded through a combination of internal, federal and state of Arizona grants as well as user fees and pharmaceutical industry collaborations. Subsets of the Program are utilized by the US National Institute on Aging Arizona Alzheimer's Disease Core Center and the US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke National Brain and Tissue Resource for Parkinson's Disease and Related Disorders. Substantial funding has also been received from the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research. The Program has made rapid autopsy a priority, with a 3.0-hour median post-mortem interval for the entire collection. The median RNA Integrity Number (RIN) for frozen brain and body tissue is 8.9 and 7.4, respectively. More than 2500 tissue requests have been served and currently about 200 are served annually. These requests have been made by more than 400 investigators located in 32 US states and 15 countries. Tissue from the BBDP has contributed to more than 350 publications and more than 200 grant-funded projects.

Characterization of fibromyalgia symptoms in patients 55-95 years old: a longitudinal study showing symptom persistence with suboptimal treatment.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia (FM) has been understudied in the elderly population, a group with particular vulnerabilities to pain, reduced mobility, and sleep disruption. AIMS: To characterize FM symptoms and treatments in a cohort of older subjects examined over time to determine the extent to which current, community-based treatment for older FM patients is in accord with published guidelines, and effective in reducing symptoms. METHODS: A longitudinal, observational study of 51 subjects with FM (range 55-95 years) and 81 control subjects (58-95 years) performed at Banner Sun Health Research Institute in Sun City, AZ, USA. Serial history and examination data were obtained over a 6-year period. FM data included medical history, medications, physical examination, tender point examination, neuropsychological testing, sleep and pain ratings, the Physical Function Subscale of the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire, and other standardized scales to evaluate depression and other psychiatric symptoms, and cognitive and functional impairment. RESULTS: Pain and stiffness that interfered with physical activity, sleep, and mood were reported by 80 % or more of subjects. Over time, pain involved an increasing number of body areas. Over half of subjects were treated with NSAIDs, one-quarter with opioids, and one-quarter with estrogen. Few were treated with dual-acting antidepressants or pregabalin. DISCUSSION: In this cohort of elders with suboptimally treated FM, substantial persistence of symptoms was seen over time. In general, recommended treatments were either not used or not tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Age-appropriate treatments as well as education of primary care providers are needed to improve treatment of FM in the older population.

Cerebral white matter rarefaction has both neurodegenerative and vascular causes and may primarily be a distal axonopathy.

Cerebral white matter rarefaction (CWMR) was considered by Binswanger and Alzheimer to be due to cerebral arteriolosclerosis. Renewed attention came with CT and MR brain imaging, and neuropathological studies finding a high rate of CWMR in Alzheimer disease (AD). The relative contributions of cerebrovascular disease and AD to CWMR are still uncertain. In 1181 autopsies by the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders (AZSAND), large-format brain sections were used to grade CWMR and determine its vascular and neurodegenerative correlates. Almost all neurodegenerative diseases had more severe CWMR than the normal control group. Multivariable logistic regression models indicated that Braak neurofibrillary stage was the strongest predictor of CWMR, with additional independently significant predictors including age, cortical and diencephalic lacunar and microinfarcts, body mass index, and female sex. It appears that while AD and cerebrovascular pathology may be additive in causing CWMR, both may be solely capable of this. The typical periventricular pattern suggests that CWMR is primarily a distal axonopathy caused by dysfunction of the cell bodies of long-association corticocortical projection neurons. A consequence of these findings is that CWMR should not be viewed simply as "small vessel disease" or as a pathognomonic indicator of vascular cognitive impairment or vascular dementia.

Severe hyposmia distinguishes neuropathologically confirmed dementia with Lewy bodies from Alzheimer's disease dementia.

Many subjects with neuropathologically-confirmed dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) are never diagnosed during life, instead being categorized as Alzheimer's disease dementia (ADD) or unspecified dementia. Unrecognized DLB therefore is a critical impediment to clinical studies and treatment trials of both ADD and DLB. There are studies that suggest that olfactory function tests may be able to distinguish DLB from ADD, but few of these had neuropathological confirmation of diagnosis. We compared University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) results in 257 subjects that went on to autopsy and neuropathological examination. Consensus clinicopathological diagnostic criteria were used to define ADD and DLB, as well as Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD), with (PDD+AD) or without (PDD-AD) concurrent AD; a group with ADD and Lewy body disease (LBD) not meeting criteria for DLB (ADLB) and a clinically normal control group were also included. The subjects with DLB, PDD+AD and PDD-AD all had lower (one-way ANOVA p < 0.0001, pairwise Bonferroni p < 0.05) first and mean UPSIT scores than the ADD, ADLB or control groups. For DLB subjects with first and mean UPSIT scores less than 20 and 17, respectively, Firth logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age, gender and mean MMSE score, conferred statistically significant odds ratios of 17.5 and 18.0 for the diagnosis, vs ADD. For other group comparisons (PDD+AD and PDD-AD vs ADD) and UPSIT cutoffs of 17, the same analyses resulted in odds ratios ranging from 16.3 to 31.6 (p < 0.0001). To our knowledge, this is the largest study to date comparing olfactory function in subjects with neuropathologically-confirmed LBD and ADD. Olfactory function testing may be a convenient and inexpensive strategy for enriching dementia studies or clinical trials with DLB subjects, or conversely, reducing the inclusion of DLB subjects in ADD studies or trials.

Faster cognitive decline in dementia due to Alzheimer disease with clinically undiagnosed Lewy body disease.

BACKGROUND: Neuropathology has demonstrated a high rate of comorbid pathology in dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (ADD). The most common major comorbidity is Lewy body disease (LBD), either as dementia with Lewy bodies (AD-DLB) or Alzheimer's disease with Lewy bodies (AD-LB), the latter representing subjects with ADD and LBD not meeting neuropathological distribution and density thresholds for DLB. Although it has been established that ADD subjects with undifferentiated LBD have a more rapid cognitive decline than those with ADD alone, it is still unknown whether AD-LB subjects, who represent the majority of LBD and approximately one-third of all those with ADD, have a different clinical course. METHODS: Subjects with dementia included those with "pure" ADD (n = 137), AD-DLB (n = 64) and AD-LB (n = 114), all with two or more complete Mini Mental State Examinations (MMSE) and a full neuropathological examination. RESULTS: Linear mixed models assessing MMSE change showed that the AD-LB group had significantly greater decline compared to the ADD group (ß = -0.69, 95% CI: -1.05, -0.33, p<0.001) while the AD-DLB group did not (ß = -0.30, 95% CI: -0.73, 0.14, p = 0.18). Of those with AD-DLB and AD-LB, only 66% and 2.1%, respectively, had been diagnosed with LBD at any point during their clinical course. Compared with clinically-diagnosed AD-DLB subjects, those that were clinically undetected had significantly lower prevalences of parkinsonism (p = 0.046), visual hallucinations (p = 0.0008) and dream enactment behavior (0.013). CONCLUSIONS: The probable cause of LBD clinical detection failure is the lack of a sufficient set of characteristic core clinical features. Core DLB clinical features were not more common in AD-LB as compared to ADD. Clinical identification of ADD with LBD would allow stratified analyses of ADD clinical trials, potentially improving the probability of trial success.