TY - JOUR
T1 - Challenges associated with biomarker-based classification systems for Alzheimer's disease
AU - Illán-Gala, Ignacio
AU - Pegueroles, Jordi
AU - Montal, Victor
AU - Vilaplana, Eduard
AU - Carmona-Iragui, María
AU - Alcolea, Daniel
AU - Dickerson, Bradford C.
AU - Sánchez-Valle, Raquel
AU - de Leon, Mony J.
AU - Blesa, Rafael
AU - Lleó, Alberto
AU - Fortea, Juan
PY - 2018/1/1
Y1 - 2018/1/1
N2 - © 2018 The Authors Introduction: We aimed to evaluate the consistency of the A/T/N classification system. Methods: We included healthy controls, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia patients from Alzheimer's disease Neuroimaging Initiative. We assessed subject classification consistency with different biomarker combinations and the agreement and correlation between biomarkers. Results: Subject classification discordance ranged from 12.2% to 44.5% in the whole sample; 17.3%–46.4% in healthy controls; 11.9%–46.5% in mild cognitive impairment, and 1%–35.7% in dementia patients. Amyloid, but not neurodegeneration biomarkers, showed good agreement both in the whole sample and in the clinical subgroups. Amyloid biomarkers were correlated in the whole sample, but not along the Alzheimer's disease continuum (as defined by a positive amyloid positron emission tomography). Neurodegeneration biomarkers were poorly correlated both in the whole sample and along the Alzheimer's disease continuum. The relationship between biomarkers was stage-dependent. Discussion: Our findings suggest that the current A/T/N classification system does not achieve the required consistency to be used in the clinical setting.
AB - © 2018 The Authors Introduction: We aimed to evaluate the consistency of the A/T/N classification system. Methods: We included healthy controls, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia patients from Alzheimer's disease Neuroimaging Initiative. We assessed subject classification consistency with different biomarker combinations and the agreement and correlation between biomarkers. Results: Subject classification discordance ranged from 12.2% to 44.5% in the whole sample; 17.3%–46.4% in healthy controls; 11.9%–46.5% in mild cognitive impairment, and 1%–35.7% in dementia patients. Amyloid, but not neurodegeneration biomarkers, showed good agreement both in the whole sample and in the clinical subgroups. Amyloid biomarkers were correlated in the whole sample, but not along the Alzheimer's disease continuum (as defined by a positive amyloid positron emission tomography). Neurodegeneration biomarkers were poorly correlated both in the whole sample and along the Alzheimer's disease continuum. The relationship between biomarkers was stage-dependent. Discussion: Our findings suggest that the current A/T/N classification system does not achieve the required consistency to be used in the clinical setting.
KW - Alzheimer's disease
KW - Biomarkers
KW - Classification systems
KW - Diagnosis
KW - Magnetic resonance
KW - Positron emission tomography
U2 - 10.1016/j.dadm.2018.03.004
DO - 10.1016/j.dadm.2018.03.004
M3 - Article
C2 - 30175226
SN - 2352-8729
VL - 10
SP - 346
EP - 357
JO - Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring
JF - Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring
ER -