Article

Maternal Family History is Associated with Alzheimer's Disease Biomarkers

KU Alzheimer's Disease Center, Department of Neurology, University of Kansas School of Medicine, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA.
Journal of Alzheimer's disease: JAD (Impact Factor: 3.61). 06/2012; 31(3):659-68. DOI: 10.3233/JAD-2012-120676
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A family history of Alzheimer's disease (AD) increases one's risk of developing late-onset AD (LOAD), and a maternal family history of LOAD influences risk more than a paternal family history. Accumulating evidence suggests that a family history of dementia associates with AD-typical biomarker changes. We analyzed cross-sectional data from non-demented, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and LOAD participants in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) with PET imaging using Pittsburgh Compound B (PiB, n = 99) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis (n = 403) for amyloid-β peptide (Aβ) and total tau. We assessed the relationship of CSF and PiB biomarkers and family history of dementia, as well as parent gender effects. In the larger analysis of CSF biomarkers, we assessed diagnosis groups individually. In the overall sample, CSF Aβ, tau/Aβ ratio, and global PiB uptake were significantly different between family history positive and negative groups, with markers of increased AD burden associated with a positive maternal family history of dementia. Moreover, a maternal family history of dementia was associated with significantly greater PiB Aβ load in the brain in the parietal cortex, precuneus, and sensorimotor cortex. Individuals with MCI positive for a maternal family history of dementia had significantly more markers of AD pathophysiology than individuals with no family history of dementia. A family history of dementia is associated with AD-typical biomarker changes. These biomarker associations are most robust in individuals with a maternal family history, suggesting that a maternally inherited factor influences AD risk.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Russell Swerdlow, Apr 03, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
122 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disease, the etiology of AD is not well understood. In some cases, genetic factors explain AD risk, but a high percentage of late-onset AD is unexplained. The fact that AD is associated with a number of physical and systemic manifestations suggests that AD is a multifactorial disease that affects both the CNS and periphery. Interestingly, a common feature of many systemic processes linked to AD is involvement in energy metabolism. The goals of this review are to 1) explore the evidence that peripheral processes contribute to AD risk, 2) explore ways that AD modulates whole-body changes, and 3) discuss the role of genetics, mitochondria, and vascular mechanisms as underlying factors that could mediate both central and peripheral manifestations of AD. Despite efforts to strictly define AD as a homogeneous CNS disease, there may be no single etiologic pathway leading to the syndrome of AD dementia. Rather, the neurodegenerative process may involve some degree of baseline genetic risk that is modified by external risk factors. Continued research into the diverse but related processes linked to AD risk is necessary for successful development of disease -modifying therapies.
    Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 04/2014; 1842(9). DOI:10.1016/j.bbadis.2014.04.012 · 4.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disease, the etiology of AD is not well understood. In some cases, genetic factors explain AD risk, but a high percentage of late-onset AD is unexplained. The fact that AD is associated with a number of physical and systemic manifestations suggests that AD is a multifactorial disease that affects both the CNS and periphery. Interestingly, a common feature of many systemic processes linked to AD is involvement in energy metabolism. The goals of this review are to 1) explore the evidence that peripheral processes contribute to AD risk, 2) explore ways that AD modulates whole-body changes, and 3) discuss the role of genetics, mitochondria, and vascular mechanisms as underlying factors that could mediate both central and peripheral manifestations of AD. Despite efforts to strictly define AD as a homogeneous CNS disease, there may be no single etiologic pathway leading to the syndrome of AD dementia. Rather, the neurodegenerative process may involve some degree of baseline genetic risk that is modified by external risk factors. Continued research into the diverse but related processes linked to AD risk is necessary for successful development of disease –modifying therapies.
    Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Basis of Disease 01/2014; · 5.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The goal of this review is to provide an overview of biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD), with emphasis on neuroimaging and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers. We first review biomarker changes in patients with late-onset AD, including findings from studies using structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), advanced MRI techniques (diffusion tensor imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, perfusion), positron emission tomography with fluorodeoxyglucose, amyloid tracers, and other neurochemical tracers, and CSF protein levels. Next, we evaluate findings from these biomarkers in preclinical and prodromal stages of AD including mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and pre-MCI conditions conferring elevated risk. We then discuss related findings in patients with dominantly inherited AD. We conclude with a discussion of the current theoretical framework for the role of biomarkers in AD and emergent directions for AD biomarker research. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Clinical Psychology Volume 9 is March 26, 2013. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/catalog/pubdates.aspx for revised estimates.
    Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 01/2013; 9(1). DOI:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185535 · 12.92 Impact Factor