Identification of an APOE ε4-specific blood-based molecular pathway for Alzheimer's disease risk.

INTRODUCTION: The precise apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4-specific molecular pathway(s) for Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk are unclear. METHODS: Plasma protein modules/cascades were analyzed using weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative study. Multivariable regression analyses were used to examine the associations among protein modules, AD diagnoses, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) phosphorylated tau (p-tau), and brain glucose metabolism, stratified by APOE genotype. RESULTS: The Green Module was associated with AD diagnosis in APOE ε4 homozygotes. Three proteins from this module, C-reactive protein (CRP), complement C3, and complement factor H (CFH), had dose-dependent associations with CSF p-tau and cognitive impairment only in APOE ε4 homozygotes. The link among these three proteins and glucose hypometabolism was observed in brain regions of the default mode network (DMN) in APOE ε4 homozygotes. A Framingham Heart Study validation study supported the findings for AD. DISCUSSION: The study identifies the APOE ε4-specific CRP-C3-CFH inflammation pathway for AD, suggesting potential drug targets for the disease.Highlights: Identification of an APOE ε4 specific molecular pathway involving blood CRP, C3, and CFH for the risk of AD.CRP, C3, and CFH had dose-dependent associations with CSF p-Tau and brain glucose hypometabolism as well as with cognitive impairment only in APOE ε4 homozygotes.Targeting CRP, C3, and CFH may be protective and therapeutic for AD onset in APOE ε4 carriers.

A longitudinal examination of plasma neurofilament light and total tau for the clinical detection and monitoring of Alzheimer's disease.

We examined baseline and longitudinal associations between plasma neurofilament light (NfL) and total tau (t-tau), and the clinical presentation of Alzheimer's disease (AD). A total of 579 participants (238, normal cognition [NC]; 185, mild cognitive impairment [MCI]; 156, AD dementia) had baseline blood draws; 82% had follow-up evaluations. Plasma samples were analyzed for NfL and t-tau using Simoa technology. Baseline plasma NfL was higher in AD dementia than MCI (standardized mean difference = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37-0.73) and NC (standardized mean difference = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.49-0.88), corresponded to Clinical Dementia Rating scores (OR = 1.94, 95% CI: 1.35-2.79]), and correlated with all neuropsychological tests (r's = 0.13-0.42). Longitudinally, NfL did not predict diagnostic conversion but predicted decline on 3/10 neuropsychological tests. Baseline plasma t-tau was higher in AD dementia than NC with a small effect (standardized mean difference = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.10-0.57) but not MCI. t-tau did not statistically significant predict any longitudinal outcomes. Plasma NfL may be useful for the detection of AD dementia and monitoring of disease progression. In contrast, there was minimal evidence in support of plasma t-tau.

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and Alzheimer disease in the presence of the apolipoprotein E4 allele.

OBJECTIVE: The effect of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors on Alzheimer disease (AD) remains unclear, with conflicting results reported. We studied the interaction of the Apolipoprotein E (ApoE) genotype and ACE inhibitors on AD. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of homebound elderly with an AD diagnosis and documentation of medications taken. ApoE genotype was determined. RESULTS: A total of 355 subjects with status on ApoE alleles and cognitive diagnoses were studied. The average age (mean ± SD) of this population was 73.3 ± 8.3 years old, and 73% were female. Cross-sectionally, there was no difference in the number of AD cases between ApoE4 carriers and ApoE4 non-carriers or between ACE inhibitor users and non-users in the homebound elderly. ApoE4 carriers treated with ACE inhibitors, however, had more diagnoses of AD compared with those who did not have the treatment (28% versus 6%, p = 0.01) or ApoE4 non-carriers treated with an ACE inhibitor (28% versus 10%, p = 0.03). ACE inhibitor use was associated with AD diagnosis only in the presence of an E4 allele. Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, we found that in diagnosed AD cases there was a significant interaction between ApoE4 and ACE inhibitor use (odds ratio: 20.85; 95% confidence interval: 3.08-140.95; p = 0.002) after adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, and education. CONCLUSION: The effects of ACE inhibitors on AD may be different depending on ApoE genotype. A prospective study is needed to determine whether ACE inhibitor use accelerates or poorly delays AD development in ApoE4 carriers compared with ApoE4 non-carriers.