Temporal Dynamics and Biological Variability of Alzheimer Biomarkers
Authors: Jihwan Yun, Daeun Shin, Eun Hye Lee, Jun Pyo Kim, Hongki Ham, Yuna Gu, Min Young Chun, Sung Hoon Kang, Hee Jin Kim, Duk L. Na, Chi-Hun Kim, Ko Woon Kim, Si Eun Kim, Yeshin Kim, Jaeho Kim, Na-Yeon Jung, Yeo Jin Kim, Soo Hyun Cho, Henrik Zetterberg, Kaj Blennow, Fernando Gonzalez-Ortiz, Nicholas J. Ashton, Joseph Therriault, Nesrine Rahmouni, Pedro Rosa-Neto, Michael W. Weiner, Sang Won Seo, Hyemin Jang, Youngsoo Kim, Sun-Ho Han, JoonKyung Seong, Jun-Kyu Choi, Eek-Sung Lee, Tak-Kyeong Lee, Juhee Chin, Chi-Hun Kim, Hee Jin Kim, Haesook Bok, Hang-Rai Kim, Seung Joo Kim, Seunghee Na, Geon Ha Kim, Jin San Lee, Hanna Cho, Byeong C. Kim, Dong Young Lee, So Young Moon, Min Soo Byun, Giijung Jung, Dahyun Yi, Han Na Lee, Jae-Won Jang, Jee Hyang Jeong, Young Hee Jung, Jong Hun Kim, Youngju Kim, Bo Kyoung Cheon, Jinkyu Seo, Young Noh, Hyunjung Yang, Youngji Ha, Hae-Eun Shin, Kyunghun Kang, SungHui Eom, Ki Young Shin, Yeongshin Kim, Jisung Jang, Changsik Yoon, Do kyung Lee, Hongki Ham, Yu Hyun Park, Soo-Jong Kim, Byunghyun Byun, Yejoo Choi, Na Kyung Lee, Hong-Hee Won, Minyoung Cho, Sang-Hyuk Jung, Dong Hyun Lee, Beomsu Kim, Paul Aisen, Ronald Petersen, Clifford R. Jack, Jr., William Jagust, John Q. Trojanowki, Arthur W. Toga, Laurel Beckett, Robert C. Green, Andrew J. Saykin, John Morris, Leslie M. Shaw, Zaven Khachaturian, Greg Sorensen, Maria Carrillo, Lew Kuller, Marc Raichle, Steven Paul, Peter Davies, Howard Fillit, Franz Hefti, David Holtzman, M. Marcel Mesulam, William Potter, Peter Snyder, Veronika Logovinsky, Tom Montine, Gustavo Jimenez, Michael Donohue, Devon Gessert, Kelly Harless, Jennifer Salazar, Yuliana Cabrera, Sarah Walter, Lindsey Hergesheimer, Danielle Harvey, Matthew Bernstein, Nick Fox, Paul Thompson, Norbert Schuff, Charles DeCarli, Bret Borowski, Jeff Gunter, Matt Senjem, Prashanthi Vemuri, David Jones, Kejal Kantarchi, Chad Ward, Robert A. Koeppe, Norm Foster, Eric M. Reiman, Kewei Chen, Chet Mathis, Susan Landau, John C. Morris, Nigel J. Cairns, Erin Franklin, Lisa Taylor-Reinwald, Virginia Lee, Magdalena Korecka, Michal Figurski, Karen Crawford, Scott Neu, Tatiana M. Foroud, Steven Potkin, Li Shen, Kelley Faber, Sungeun Kim, Kwangsik Nho, Lean Thal, Neil Buckholtz, Marilyn Albert, Richard Frank, John Hsiao, Cecile Tissot, Gleb Bezgin, Stijn Servaes, Jenna Stevenson, Serge Gauthier, Paolo Vitali
Journal: JAMA Neurology (2025)

Importance Understanding the characteristics of discordance between plasma biomarkers and positron emission tomography (PET) results in Alzheimer disease (AD) is crucial for accurate interpretation of the findings. Objective To compare (1) medical comorbidities affecting plasma biomarker concentrations, (2) imaging and clinical features, and (3) cognitive changes between plasma biomarker and PET discordant and concordant cases. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter cohort study, conducted between 2016 and 2023, included individuals with unimpaired cognition, mild cognitive impairment, or Alzheimer-type dementia, who had both amyloid β (Aβ) PET imaging and plasma biomarkers. A subset of participants also underwent tau PET imaging. Exposures Participants were categorized into 4 groups based on their plasma and PET biomarker results: plasma−/PET−, plasma+/PET−, plasma−/PET+, and plasma+/PET+. Main Outcomes and Measures Clinical characteristics were compared between the 4 groups, focusing on the discordant groups. Results A total of 2611 participants (mean [SD] age was 71.2 [8.7] years; 1656 female [63.4%]), of whom 124 additionally underwent tau PET, were included. Among the plasma biomarkers, phosphorylated tau (p-tau) 217 exhibited the highest concordance rate with Aβ (2326 of 2571 [90.5%]) and tau (100 of 120 [83.3%]) PET. The p-tau217+/Aβ PET− group was older (mean [SD] age, 75.8 [7.2] years vs 70.0 [8.8] years; P &amp;amp;lt; .001) with a higher prevalence of hypertension (56 of 152 [36.8%] vs 266 of 1073 [25.0%]), diabetes (40 of 152 [26.3%] vs 156 of 1059 [14.7%]), and chronic kidney disease (17 of 152 [11.2%] vs 21 of 1073 [2.0%]) compared with the p-tau217−/Aβ PET− group ( P &amp;amp;lt; .001 for all). Body mass index was higher in p-tau217−/Aβ PET+ than in p-tau217+/Aβ PET+ (mean [SD], 24.1 [2.8] vs 23.1 [3.1], respectively; P = .001; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared). The p-tau217+/Aβ PET− group had lower hippocampal volume (mean [SD], 2555.4 [576.9] vs 2979.1 [545.8]; P &amp;amp;lt; .001) and worse clinical trajectory compared with p-tau217−/Aβ PET− (β = −0.53; P &amp;amp;lt; .001). In contrast, tau PET discordant cases did not show significant differences in medical comorbidities or clinical outcomes compared with the p-tau217−/tau PET− group. Only the p-tau 217+/tau PET+ group demonstrated faster cognitive deterioration compared with the p-tau 217−/tau PET− group (β = −1.66; P &amp;amp;lt; .001). Conclusions and Relevance Results of this cohort study suggest that the mechanisms underlying the discordance between plasma biomarkers and PET findings may be multifaceted, underscoring the need to consider the temporal dynamics and biological variability of plasma biomarkers.