Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:46:22.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Use of Alzheimer’s Disease Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers in A Tertiary Care Memory Clinic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2021

Michael Stiffel
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
David Bergeron*
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Karim Mourabit Amari
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de biochimie, CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Département de biochimie, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Élizabeth Poulin
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Xavier Roberge
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Synthia Meilleur-Durand
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Leila Sellami
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Pierre Molin
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Yannick Nadeau
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Marie-Pierre Fortin
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Stéphanie Caron
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Stéphane Poulin
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Louis Verret
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Rémi W. Bouchard
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
Charlotte Teunissen
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Chemistry, Neurochemistry Laboratory and Biobank, Amsterdam Neuroscience, VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Robert Jr Laforce
Affiliation:
Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques du CHU de Québec, and Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
*
Correspondence to: David Bergeron, Département des Sciences Neurologiques, Université Laval, CHU de Québec, 1401, 18ième rue, Québec, Canada, G1J 1Z4. Email : david.bergeron.5@ulaval.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Introduction:

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers are promising tools to help identify the underlying pathology of neurocognitive disorders. In this manuscript, we report our experience with AD CSF biomarkers in 262 consecutive patients in a tertiary care memory clinic.

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed 262 consecutive patients who underwent lumbar puncture (LP) and CSF measurement of AD biomarkers (Aβ1–42, total tau or t-tau, and p-tau181). We studied the safety of the procedure and its impact on patient’s diagnosis and management.

Results:

The LP allowed to identify underlying AD pathology in 72 of the 121 patients (59%) with early onset amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) with a high probability of progression to AD; to distinguish the behavioral/dysexecutive variant of AD from the behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) in 25 of the 45 patients (55%) with an atypical neurobehavioral profile; to identify AD as the underlying pathology in 15 of the 27 patients (55%) with atypical or unclassifiable primary progressive aphasia (PPA); and to distinguish AD from other disorders in 9 of the 29 patients (31%) with psychiatric differential diagnoses and 19 of the 40 patients (47%) with lesional differential diagnoses (normal pressure hydrocephalus, encephalitis, prion disease, etc.). No major complications occurred following the LP.

Interpretation:

Our results suggest that CSF analysis is a safe and effective diagnostic tool in select patients with neurocognitive disorders. We advocate for a wider use of this biomarker in tertiary care memory clinics in Canada.

Résumé :

RÉSUMÉ :

Utilisation dans une clinique de la mémoire des biomarqueurs du liquide cérébrospinal dans des cas de patients atteints de la maladie d’Alzheimer.

Introduction :

Dans le cas de la maladie d’Alzheimer (MA), les biomarqueurs du liquide cérébrospinal (LCS) constituent des outils prometteurs pour identifier la pathologie sous-jacente des troubles neurocognitifs. Dans cet article, nous voulons faire état de notre expérience avec ces biomarqueurs chez 262 patients vus consécutivement dans une clinique de la mémoire.

Méthodes :

Nous avons ainsi passé en revue rétrospectivement les dossiers de 262 patients qui avaient subi une ponction lombaire (PL) et chez qui l’on avait quantifié les biomarqueurs du LCS (protéine amyloïde A1-42, protéine Tau totale et protéine Tau 181). Nous avons aussi évalué la sécurité de cette procédure ainsi que son impact sur la prise en charge des patients et sur leur diagnostic.

Résultats :

Les PL ont permis d’identifier une pathologie sous-jacente à la MA chez 72 patients sur 121 (59 %), à savoir des troubles cognitifs légers (TCL) de nature amnésique apparaissant à un stade précoce et dont la probabilité de progresser vers la MA était élevée. Qui plus est, cet examen a permis de distinguer la variante comportementale/dysexécutive de la MA de la variante comportementale de la démence fronto-temporale chez 25 patients sur 45 (55 %) dont le profil neurocomportemental était atypique. Il a également permis d’identifier la MA comme pathologie sous-jacente chez 15 patients sur 27 (55 %) atteints d’aphasie primaire progressive atypique ou inclassable et de distinguer la MA d’autres troubles chez 9 patients sur 29 (31 %) ayant reçu un diagnostic psychiatrique différentiel et chez 19 patients sur 40 (47 %) ayant reçu des diagnostics différentiels de lésions (hydrocéphalie à pression normale, encéphalite, maladies à prions, etc.). Il est à noter qu’aucune complication majeure n’est survenue à la suite de PL.

Interprétation :

Nos résultats donnent à penser que des analyses menées au moyen des PL sont des outils diagnostics sécuritaires chez certains patients atteints de troubles neurocognitifs. Nous plaidons donc pour une utilisation plus large des biomarqueurs du LCS dans les cliniques de la mémoire au Canada.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation

Introduction

Lumbar puncture (LP) is a simple technique to sample cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) as a window into central nervous system (CNS) biochemistry. A large body of literature now suggests that a biological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) can be made using measurements of pathogenic proteins in the CSF. Reference Zetterberg, Rohrer and Schott1 We have known for more than 25 years that decreased amyloid β levels in CSF reflect aggregation into plaques of cerebral amyloid β Reference Zetterberg, Rohrer and Schott1-Reference Van Nostrand, Wagner and Shankle5 – a core feature of AD pathological diagnosis Reference McKhann, Knopman and Chertkow6 ; and that high levels of microtubule-associated protein tau in CSF reflect axonal pathology in AD. Reference Blennow, Wallin, Agren, Spenger, Siegfried and Vanmechelen7,Reference Vigo-Pelfrey, Seubert and Barbour8 CSF analysis is now recognized as a reliable diagnostic tool for AD in NIA-AA and IWG-2 diagnostic criteria, Reference McKhann, Knopman and Chertkow6,Reference Dubois, Feldman and Jacova9 and is widely used in European academic memory clinics. Reference Duits, Martinez-Lage and Paquet10-Reference van Waalwijk van Doorn, Kulic and Koel-Simmelink14 In Canada, CSF samples are collected in academic dementia centers as part of the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), Reference Kang, Korecka and Figurski15 but the clinical use of CSF analysis in neurocognitive diseases remains scarce to this date. Reference Duits, Martinez-Lage and Paquet10-Reference van Waalwijk van Doorn, Kulic and Koel-Simmelink14,Reference Rosa-Neto, Hsiung and Masellis16 In our experience, CSF analysis is a useful tool to reach an earlier and more accurate diagnosis in patients with early onset atypical dementia, for whom the initial dementia workup did not allow to reach a clear diagnosis. In this manuscript, we report our clinical experience with CSF analysis in the diagnostic workup of 262 consecutive patients seen at our tertiary care memory clinic.

Methods

Patient Selection and Diagnostic Workflow

The Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire du CHU de Québec (CIME) is the oldest memory clinic in Canada. Reference Laforce, Verret, Poulin, Fortin and Houde17 It is visited by an average of 1500 patients per year, generally for further evaluation after an inconclusive initial assessment by a primary care physician. All patients were assessed according to the “Recommendations of the 4th and 5th Canadian Consensus Conference on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia.” Initial consultation typically includes history-taking, physical examination, cognitive screening, targeted cognitive screening, basic blood work, and brain imaging with computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In our experience, this initial diagnostic workup allows to reach a probable diagnosis in about 70% of patients. Reference Bensaidane, Beauregard and Poulin18,Reference Bergeron, Beauregard and Guimond19 When diagnosis remains unclear, patients can be referred to further neuropsychological testing or 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET). When the diagnosis is still unclear, clinicians can repeat FDG-PET Reference Bergeron, Beauregard and Guimond19 or order either an amyloid PET Reference Bensaidane, Beauregard and Poulin18 or an LP with CSF analysis of AD biomarkers (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Diagnostic workup at Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire du CHU de Québec, a tertiary care memory clinic in Quebec City, QC, Canada.

Lumbar Puncture and Cerebrospinal Fluid Analysis

All LPs were performed by three experienced neurologists (LV, RWB, RL) according to the Canadian and International Guidelines. Reference Rosa-Neto, Hsiung and Masellis16,Reference Engelborghs, Niemantsverdriet and Struyfs20-Reference Teunissen, Petzold and Bennett22 We collected a total of 5-20 ml of CSF divided into three to four sterile polypropylene tubes of approximately 10ml of CSF each: (1) cell count; (2) glucose, proteins; (3) AD biomarkers; and (4) further infectious and/or autoimmune investigation in select cases. Traumatic taps causing blood contamination of CSF were not used for biomarker study. Patients remained supine for 15–30 min, followed by progressive mobilization. All polypropylene tubes identified for AD biomarker analysis were centrifuged at 2000 × g for 10 min at room temperature within 15 min of LP. They were split into 2 ml aliquots in small polypropylene tubes and kept at –80 °C using dry ice. One 2 ml tube was sent overseas by express mail on dry ice to Amsterdam VUmc Alzheimercentrum for AD biomarker analysis. Other 2 ml was stored locally at –80 °C. Aβ-42, total tau (t-tau), and tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (p-tau181) concentrations were measured with INNO-BIA AlzBio3 Luminex assay (Fujirebio, formerly Innogenetics, Gent, Belgium). All CSF analyses were performed at the end of the study at the VUmc in Amsterdam in the Netherlands. Reference values were >640 pg/ml for Aβ-42, <375 pg/ml for t-tau, and <52 pg/ml for p-tau181 according to single-center validation studies. Reference Zwan, van Harten and Ossenkoppele23-Reference Mulder, Verwey and van der Flier25 Due to the upward drift of Aβ-42 values measured with Innotest ELISA over the past two decades (caused by changes in ELISA kits over time), reference values for Aβ-42 changed over time, first >550 pg/ml, then >640 pg/ml, >680 pg/ml, then >1000 pg/ml. Reference Schindler, Sutphen and Teunissen26 An AD CSF profile was established when Aβ-42 was lowered and at least one tau measurement was elevated. When absolute values were at the limit of positivity, a ratio of p-tau/Aβ-42 was calculated to facilitate interpretation of the results; a ratio exceeding 0.024 was considered suggestive of Alzheimer’s pathophysiology.

Data Collection and Statistical Analyses

For all patients, we retrospectively retrieved the following variables: age at the time of LP, sex, number of years of education, MMSE score/30 closest to LP (<6 months), date of LP, Aβ-42, t-tau, and p-tau181 level, minor and/or major complications of LP (minor: post-LP headache, minor infection not requiring antibiotics; major: CNS infection requiring antibiotics, significant bleeding, post-LP headache requiring blood patch, etc.), date of amyloid PET if applicable, visual read of amyloid PET (positive/negative), concordance between LP and amyloid PET, primary and alternative diagnoses prior to LP, primary and alternative diagnoses following LP, change in diagnosis and/or management following LP. Analyses were performed using SPSS (version 22; IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) and STATA (version 14; StataCorp; College Station, TX, USA). Differences in demographical characteristics were assessed using ANOVA for continuous variables and χ 2 or Mann-Whitney U tests for dichotomous or categorical data.

Results

Patient Characteristics

Between July 2015 and April 2020, 3755 patients were evaluated at the CIME tertiary care memory clinic; in 262 patients (7%), an LP was performed to help clarify the diagnosis of the neurocognitive disorder. In these patients, the initial memory clinic workup, including history taking, neurological examination, cognitive testing, blood tests, MRI, and FDG-PET did not allow to reach a clear diagnosis. Patient characteristics are shown in Table 1. Patients were on average young (67.5 ± 2 years old), well-educated (12.7 ± 2 years of education), and at an early disease stage (MMSE 26 ± 3). Indication for LP covered a wide range of clinical scenarios (see Figure 2). Over the 262 LP, 121 (46%) were ordered to identify underlying AD pathology in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) with a high probability of progression to AD, 45 (17%) were ordered to distinguish the behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) from the dysexecutive variant of AD, 27 (10%) to identify the underlying pathology in primary progressive aphasia (PPA) with mixed/unclassifiable features, 29 (11%) to differentiate AD from psychiatric conditions (depression, psychotic disorder, attentional disorders, bipolar disorder, etc.), and 40 (15%) to distinguish AD from other conditions.

Table 1: Demographics of the sample

MCI = mild cognitive impairment.

Figure 2: Clinical indications for CSF analysis. A+=amyloid-positive; A−=amyloid-negative; AD=Alzheimer’s disease; aMCI=amnestic mild cognitive impairment; FTD=frontotemporal dementia; PPA=primary progressive aphasia; Psy=Psychiatric disorder.

CSF Results

In the total cohort, 140 out of 262 (53%) patients had lowered Aβ-42 levels compared to 122 patients with normal Aβ-42 levels. Of those, 49 out of 101 (49%) patients 65 years old or less were amyloid-positive compared to 91 out of 151 (56%) older than 65 years old. Seven patients had both CSF analysis and amyloid PET results. CSF and amyloid PET were concordant in 6/7 (86%) of cases for amyloid β status. The discordant case was a patient with chronic alcohol use, depression, and a clinical suspicion of AD whose amyloid PET was negative, CSF Aβ-42 was borderline (550 pg/ml), and t-tau and p-tau181 was normal (163 pg/ml and 25 pg/ml, respectively).

Impact on Diagnosis and Management

The LP was performed to rule out the presence of AD pathology in 121 patients with aMCI (mean MMSE 26.7). The LP showed a CSF profile consistent with AD pathophysiology in 72/121 patients (59%); these patients were diagnosed with aMCI due to AD pathology and treatment with acetylcholinesterase inhibitor was initiated. The 49 patients with normal CSF profiles were reassured that the LP did not reveal changes consistent with AD, and that patients with amyloid-negative MCI generally have a better cognitive prognosis. In patients with an atypical cognitive profile or abnormal FDG-PET, an alternative neurodegenerative pathology was considered. One patient received a diagnosis of bvFTD and a second diagnosis of primary age-related tauopathy (PART).

The LP was performed in 45 patients to distinguish AD versus FTD pathology in patients with atypical behavioral presentation. The LP showed a CSF profile consistent with AD pathophysiology in 25/45 (55%) of patients, leading to a diagnosis of behavioral/dysexecutive AD. 20/45 patients were amyloid-negative. Seventeen patients were diagnosed with bvFTD, one with corticobasal syndrome, and two patients had uncertain diagnoses at the time the charts were analyzed. The LP leads to a change in the primary diagnosis in 23 (51%) of the cases.

The LP was performed in 27 patients with PPA and a clinicoanatomical syndrome, which did not allow confident classification among one of the three variants. The LP showed a CSF profile consistent with AD pathophysiology in 15/27 (55%) of patients, leading to a diagnosis of AD with language presentation (logopenic variant of PPA or mixed PPA due to AD). 12/27 patients were amyloid-negative and was diagnosed with PPA due to FTD pathology. More specifically, amyloid-negative patients were diagnosed with the semantic (four patients) and non-fluent (four patients) variants of PPA, primary progressive apraxia of speech (one patient), and subjective memory complaints (three patients).

In 40 patients, the LP was performed to distinguish AD from other disorders like vascular dementia, normal pressure hydrocephalus, paraneoplastic encephalitis, LGG1 encephalitis, prion disease, etc. The CSF was suggestive of AD pathophysiology in 19/40 (47%) of patients, in whom treatment with acetylcholinesterase inhibitor was initiated. In seven patients, biochemistry, cell count, and culture of the CSF contributed to diagnosing conditions such as limbic encephalitis and multiple sclerosis, or to rule out conditions such as Creutzfeld-Jackob disease. In six patients with disproportionate hydrocephalus on imaging, the LP allowed measurement of the clinical response to CSF drainage (lumbar tap test); four of these patients were diagnosed with normal pressure hydrocephalus and two patients did not improve following the LP and had CSF analysis consistent with AD. In 29 patients, the CSF analysis was allowed to distinguish AD from psychiatric disorders. The CSF profile was consistent with AD pathophysiology in 9/29 (31%) patients, hence a diagnosis of AD with neuropsychiatric symptoms was made. The 20 patients with normal CSF profiles were reassured that the LP did not reveal changes consistent with AD and were diagnosed with primary psychiatric diagnoses (ranging from dysthymic conditions, adult-onset attention disorder to psychosis). One patient was diagnosed with behavioral bvFTD at follow-up.

The ultimate goal of LP is to improve diagnostic accuracy and guide clinical decisions with regard to treatment. In the total cohort of 262 patients, 140 (53%) patients received positive LP results with CSF biomarkers compatible with AD pathology. Of these 140 patients with positive LP, 117 (84%) began treatment with an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor on follow-up. Of the remaining patients, 23 (16%) were already taking an inhibitor prior to their LP (prescribed either by the referring physician or by the memory clinic team based on the etiological hypothesis) and this was continued. In total, 32 (12%) patients who consulted were already taking inhibitors, 27 (84%) were continued following LP, and 5 (16%) were stopped.

Safety of the Procedure

We systematically reviewed patients’ charts for minor or major complications. Six patients had persistent post-LP headaches requiring a blood patch. Nine patients had minor complications such as temporary positional headache not requiring blood patch (six) and back pain (three). No patients had an iatrogenic CNS infection, hematoma, or brain herniation.

Interpretation

In this manuscript, we report our experience with LP and CSF analysis in the diagnosis of 262 patients with neurocognitive disorders in a tertiary care memory clinic. To our knowledge, this is the most significant clinical experience with CSF analysis in this context in Canada. CSF analysis helped reach an early diagnosis of aMCI due to AD in patients with aMCI at high risk for AD, helped distinguish clinical variants of AD (dysexecutive, language) from FTD variants, and helped distinguish AD from other disorders (psychiatric, vascular, inflammatory, etc.). CSF Aβ-42 was concordant with amyloid PET in 83% of the cases, consistent with previous studies. Reference Zwan, van Harten and Ossenkoppele23,Reference Janelidze, Pannee and Mikulskis27,Reference Leuzy, Chiotis and Hasselbalch28 In some patients, the LP allowed to confirm or exclude alternate diagnoses through biochemistry, cell count, and culture of CSF; or through clinical evaluation following lumbar tap test. No major complication occurred following the LP. These results suggest that CSF analysis is a safe and effective diagnostic tool in complex/atypical dementia cases, hence that Canadian memory clinics would benefit to implement infrastructure to handle and analyze CSF biomarkers for AD and other dementias.

Safety of Lumbar Puncture in the Memory Clinic

Our study confirmed the safety of LP in the memory clinic, with only six major complications (2%; persisting positional headache requiring blood patch) and nine minor complications (3%; temporary headache and/or back pain) over 262 patients. In the multicenter LP feasibility study, a consortium of 23 European academic dementia centers recently studied the performance and complications of LP for dementia diagnosis in a cohort of 3868 patients. Reference Duits, Martinez-Lage and Paquet10 After the procedure, 17% of patients reported back pain and 19% of patients reported headaches. Headaches resolved within 4 d in 78% of the cases. Only 11 patients (0.3%) received a blood patch, in which 23 (0.7%) were hospitalized. An atraumatic needle and age >65 years were associated with a lower prevalence of post-LP complaints. Of course, less invasive biomarkers (such as blood biomarkers) would represent preferable diagnostic tools; however, the blood-brain barrier makes it difficult to identify CNS proteins in the blood in sufficient levels to reach acceptable diagnostic accuracy for clinical use. Reference Keshavan, Heslegrave, Zetterberg and Schott29 Some high-fidelity assays have shown reasonable correspondence with CSF amyloid and tau levels, but their accuracy would currently allow for pre-screening at best. Reference Palmqvist, Janelidze and Stomrud30

Diagnostic Properties of CSF Biomarkers and Comparison with Amyloid PET

In this study, the strong diagnostic impact of CSF analysis was derived from the assumption that CSF Aβ-42, t-tau, and p-tau181 reliably reflect AD neuropathology; gold-standard autopsy confirmation was not available in any patient. Converging evidence has highlighted the inverse correlation between CSF Aβ-42 and cerebral Aβ plaques at autopsy or brain biopsy in healthy controls, MCI, AD, and non-AD dementias. Reference Seeburger, Holder and Combrinck31-Reference Strozyk, Blennow, White and Launer34 CSF t-tau and p-tau181 were also shown to correlate with neocortical tangle pathology at autopsy or brain biopsy. Reference Seppala, Nerg and Koivisto32,Reference Tapiola, Alafuzoff and Herukka33,Reference Buerger, Ewers and Pirttila35 Subsequently, the emergence of PET Aβ and Tau ligands have enabled visualization of Aβ plaques in the brain in living patients. Reference Villemagne, Dore and Bourgeat36 Concordance between amyloid positivity shown by CSF Aβ-42 and amyloid PET has consistently remained around 90% regardless of the ligand. Reference Mo, Stromswold and Wilson13,Reference Lewczuk, Riederer and O’Bryant21,Reference Zwan, van Harten and Ossenkoppele23,Reference Janelidze, Pannee and Mikulskis27,Reference Herukka, Simonsen and Andreasen37-Reference Alvarez, Aguilar and Gonzalez43 and CSF t-tau, and p-tau181 showed good correlation with Tau PET tracer binding. Reference Mattsson, Scholl and Strandberg44-Reference Gordon, Friedrichsen and Brier46 In MCI, abnormal CSF Aβ-42, t-tau, and p-tau181 status has been associated with higher prevalence and faster pace of conversion from MCI to AD. Reference Herukka, Simonsen and Andreasen37,Reference van Maurik, Zwan and Tijms47-Reference Handels, Wimo and Dodel49

Limitations and Future Perspectives

Limitations of the use of CSF analysis in tertiary care memory clinics include the invasiveness of the technique, the risk of minor and major complications, the lack of harmonization of methods for the handling of CSF samples, and the upward drift in CSF Aβ-42 values over time due to changes in ELISA kits. Reference Schindler, Sutphen and Teunissen26,Reference Mattsson, Andreasson and Persson50,Reference Verwey, van der Flier and Blennow51 Ongoing multicenter efforts aim to better standardize the handling and analysis of CSF samples in order to facilitate their widespread clinical use. Reference Lewczuk, Riederer and O’Bryant21,Reference Herukka, Simonsen and Andreasen37,Reference Frisoni, Boccardi and Barkhof52-Reference Teunissen, Otto and Engelborghs54 Our study has limitations. Our study was a retrospective evaluation of the use of LP at our memory clinic. This implies a significant selection bias, since the LP was performed only in a minority of patients evaluated at our memory clinic (see Figure 1), when the standard memory clinic workup (clinical and neuropsychological evaluation, lab tests, MRI, FDG-PET) did not allow to reach a clear diagnosis. Nevertheless, our study provides real-world data on the clinical use of CSF analysis in the tertiary care memory clinic. In this study, we only had access to CSF Aβ-42, t-tau, and p-tau181 measurements, consistent with international consensus recommendations. Reference Herukka, Simonsen and Andreasen37,Reference Simonsen, Herukka and Andreasen55 However, the field of CSF-based biomarkers is rapidly evolving, and multiple novel assays are now available to evaluate Aβ metabolism (sAPPα, sAPPβ, Aβ-40, Aβ-38), synucleinopathies (a-synuclein), neurodegeneration (neurofilament, NSE, VLP-1, neurogranin, HFABP), and glial activation (YKL-40, MCP-1, GFAP). Reference Zetterberg, Rohrer and Schott1,Reference Olsson, Lautner and Andreasson56-Reference Teunissen and Parnetti58 Although validated assays for these new biomarkers are not readily available for clinical practice, they hold great potential to improve diagnostic accuracy in AD, but also in FTD and other neurodegenerative disorders. Reference Olsson, Lautner and Andreasson56,Reference Llorens, Schmitz, Ferrer and Zerr57,Reference Vijverberg, Dols and Krudop59-Reference Mattsson, Insel and Palmqvist62 Therefore, while PET currently does not allow the concomitant use of multiple tracers, CSF analysis has the potential to inform us on the homeostasis of a wide range of biological pathways in order to reach a more accurate biological diagnosis of dementia. Finally, some would argue that LP represents an invasive treatment to diagnose disorders for which cannot benefit from disease-modifying treatments. There is evidence, although inconsistent, that initiation of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors early in the disease (even at the MCI stage) can delay the progression to the dementia stage. Reference Kishi, Matsunaga, Oya, Ikuta and Iwata63-Reference Seltzer, Zolnouni and Nunez65 Furthermore, in early onset dementia, a timely diagnosis also greatly reduces the anxiety related to the diagnostic uncertainty and allows to better plan for future care. Reference Bensaidane, Beauregard and Poulin18,Reference Dubois, Padovani, Scheltens, Rossi and Dell’Agnello66

Conclusion

Altogether, our results highlight the safety and clinical utility of CSF biomarkers for the diagnosis of select patients with neurocognitive disorders, and advocate for their increased use in tertiary care memory clinics in Canada.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the Primary Progressive Aphasia Research Chair – Lemaire Family Fund at Université Laval and the Vanier Graduate Scholarship of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for funding this research.

Conflict of Interest

We have no competing interests to disclose.

Statement of Authorship

MS and DB contributed equally to this work. DB, MS, and RJrL were involved in study design, data analysis, and drafting the initial version of the manuscript. MS, DB, EP, XR SMD were involved in data collection. KM coordinated the handling of CSF samples. LS, PM YN, MPF, SC, SP, LV RWB, and RJrL are clinicians at the CIME who were involved in implementing CSF analysis as a diagnostic tool for atypical dementia. CT was our main collaborator at VUmc Alzheimercentrum and shared her experience in using CSF analysis for dementia diagnosis. All authors provided input to the manuscript and agreed on the final version of the manuscript.

Footnotes

Michael Stiffel and David Bergeron contributed equally to this work.

References

Zetterberg, H, Rohrer, JD, Schott, JM. Cerebrospinal fluid in the dementias. Handb Clin Neurol. 2017;146:8597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Gool, WA, Kuiper, MA, Walstra, GJ, Wolters, EC, Bolhuis, PA. Concentrations of amyloid beta protein in cerebrospinal fluid of patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Neurol. 1995;37:277–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farlow, M, Ghetti, B, Benson, MD, Farrow, JS, van Nostrand, WE, Wagner, SL. Low cerebrospinal-fluid concentrations of soluble amyloid beta-protein precursor in hereditary Alzheimer’s disease. Lancet. 1992;340:453–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seubert, P, Vigo-Pelfrey, C, Esch, F, et al. Isolation and quantification of soluble Alzheimer’s beta-peptide from biological fluids. Nature. 1992;359:325–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Nostrand, WE, Wagner, SL, Shankle, WR, et al. Decreased levels of soluble amyloid beta-protein precursor in cerebrospinal fluid of live Alzheimer disease patients. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992;89:2551–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKhann, GM, Knopman, DS, Chertkow, H, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7:263–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blennow, K, Wallin, A, Agren, H, Spenger, C, Siegfried, J, Vanmechelen, E. Tau protein in cerebrospinal fluid: a biochemical marker for axonal degeneration in Alzheimer disease? Mol Chem Neuropathol. 1995;26:231–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vigo-Pelfrey, C, Seubert, P, Barbour, R, et al. Elevation of microtubule-associated protein tau in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology. 1995;45:788–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dubois, B, Feldman, HH, Jacova, C, et al. Advancing research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s disease: the IWG-2 criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:614–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duits, FH, Martinez-Lage, P, Paquet, C, et al. Performance and complications of lumbar puncture in memory clinics: results of the multicenter lumbar puncture feasibility study. Alzheimers Dement. 2016;12:154–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gabelle, A, Dumurgier, J, Vercruysse, O, et al. Impact of the 2008–2012 French Alzheimer Plan on the use of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in research memory center: the PLM Study. J Alzheimers Dis. 2013;34:297305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, AM, Balasa, M, Blennow, K, et al. Current approaches and clinician attitudes to the use of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in diagnostic evaluation of dementia in Europe. J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;60:201–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mo, Y, Stromswold, J, Wilson, K, et al. A multinational study distinguishing Alzheimer’s and healthy patients using cerebrospinal fluid tau/Abeta42 cutoff with concordance to amyloid positron emission tomography imaging. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2017;6:201–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Waalwijk van Doorn, LJC, Kulic, L, Koel-Simmelink, MJA, et al. Multicenter analytical validation of Abeta40 immunoassays. Front Neurol. 2017;8:310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kang, JH, Korecka, M, Figurski, MJ, et al. The Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative 2 biomarker core: a review of progress and plans. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11:772–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosa-Neto, P, Hsiung, GY, Masellis, M, participants C. Fluid biomarkers for diagnosing dementia: rationale and the Canadian Consensus on Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia recommendations for Canadian physicians. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2013;5:S8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laforce, R Jr, Verret, L, Poulin, S, Fortin, MP, Houde, M. Remi W Bouchard, a pioneer in behavioural neurology. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16:344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bensaidane, MR, Beauregard, JM, Poulin, S, et al. Clinical utility of amyloid PET imaging in the differential diagnosis of atypical dementias and its impact on caregivers. J Alzheimers Dis. 2016;52:1251–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bergeron, D, Beauregard, JM, Guimond, J, et al. Clinical impact of a second FDG-PET in atypical/unclear dementia syndromes. J Alzheimers Dis. 2016;49:695705.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engelborghs, S, Niemantsverdriet, E, Struyfs, H, et al. Consensus guidelines for lumbar puncture in patients with neurological diseases. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2017;8:111–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewczuk, P, Riederer, P, O’Bryant, SE, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid and blood biomarkers for neurodegenerative dementias: an update of the Consensus of the Task Force on Biological Markers in Psychiatry of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2018;19:244328.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teunissen, CE, Petzold, A, Bennett, JL, et al. A consensus protocol for the standardization of cerebrospinal fluid collection and biobanking. Neurology. 2009;73:1914–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zwan, M, van Harten, A, Ossenkoppele, R, et al. Concordance between cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and [11C]PIB PET in a memory clinic cohort. J Alzheimers Dis. 2014;41:801–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duits, FH, Teunissen, CE, Bouwman, FH, et al. The cerebrospinal fluid “Alzheimer profile”: easily said, but what does it mean? Alzheimers Dement. 2014;10:713–23 e2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mulder, C, Verwey, NA, van der Flier, WM, et al. Amyloid-beta(1–42), total tau, and phosphorylated tau as cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. Clin Chem. 2010;56:248–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schindler, SE, Sutphen, CL, Teunissen, C, et al. Upward drift in cerebrospinal fluid amyloid beta 42 assay values for more than 10 years. Alzheimers Dement. 2018;14:6270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Janelidze, S, Pannee, J, Mikulskis, A, et al. Concordance between different amyloid immunoassays and visual amyloid positron emission tomographic assessment. JAMA Neurol. 2017;74:1492–501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leuzy, A, Chiotis, K, Hasselbalch, SG, et al. Pittsburgh compound B imaging and cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-beta in a multicentre European memory clinic study. Brain. 2016;139:2540–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keshavan, A, Heslegrave, A, Zetterberg, H, Schott, JM. Blood biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease: much promise, cautious progress. Mol Diagn Ther. 2017;21:1322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palmqvist, S, Janelidze, S, Stomrud, E, et al. Performance of fully automated plasma assays as screening tests for Alzheimer disease-related beta-amyloid status. JAMA Neurol. 2019;76:1060–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seeburger, JL, Holder, DJ, Combrinck, M, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers distinguish postmortem-confirmed Alzheimer’s disease from other dementias and healthy controls in the OPTIMA cohort. J Alzheimers Dis. 2015;44:525–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seppala, TT, Nerg, O, Koivisto, AM, et al. CSF biomarkers for Alzheimer disease correlate with cortical brain biopsy findings. Neurology. 2012;78:1568–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tapiola, T, Alafuzoff, I, Herukka, SK, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid {beta}-amyloid 42 and tau proteins as biomarkers of Alzheimer-type pathologic changes in the brain. Arch Neurol. 2009;66:382–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strozyk, D, Blennow, K, White, LR, Launer, LJ. CSF Abeta 42 levels correlate with amyloid-neuropathology in a population-based autopsy study. Neurology. 2003;60:652–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buerger, K, Ewers, M, Pirttila, T, et al. CSF phosphorylated tau protein correlates with neocortical neurofibrillary pathology in Alzheimer’s disease. Brain. 2006;129:3035–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Villemagne, VL, Dore, V, Bourgeat, P, et al. Abeta-amyloid and tau imaging in dementia. Semin Nucl Med. 2017;47:7588.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herukka, SK, Simonsen, AH, Andreasen, N, et al. Recommendations for cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers in the diagnostic evaluation of mild cognitive impairment. Alzheimers Dement. 2017;13:285–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ben Bouallegue, F, Mariano-Goulart, D, Payoux, P, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging, I. Comparison of CSF markers and semi-quantitative amyloid PET in Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis and in cognitive impairment prognosis using the ADNI-2 database. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2017;9:32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doecke, JD, Rembach, A, Villemagne, VL, et al. Concordance between cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers with Alzheimer’s disease pathology between three independent assay platforms. J Alzheimers Dis. 2018;61:169–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mattsson, N, Insel, PS, Landau, S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of CSF Ab42 and florbetapir PET for Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2014;1:534–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landau, SM, Lu, M, Joshi, AD, et al. Comparing positron emission tomography imaging and cerebrospinal fluid measurements of beta-amyloid. Ann Neurol. 2013;74:826–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grimmer, T, Riemenschneider, M, Forstl, H, et al. Beta amyloid in Alzheimer’s disease: increased deposition in brain is reflected in reduced concentration in cerebrospinal fluid. Biol Psychiatry. 2009;65:927–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alvarez, I, Aguilar, M, Gonzalez, JM, et al. Clinic-based validation of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers with florbetapir PET for diagnosis of dementia. J Alzheimers Dis. 2018;61:135–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mattsson, N, Scholl, M, Strandberg, O, et al. (18)F-AV-1451 and CSF T-tau and P-tau as biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease. EMBO Mol Med. 2017;9:1212–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chhatwal, JP, Schultz, AP, Marshall, GA, et al. Temporal T807 binding correlates with CSF tau and phospho-tau in normal elderly. Neurology. 2016;87:920–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, BA, Friedrichsen, K, Brier, M, et al. The relationship between cerebrospinal fluid markers of Alzheimer pathology and positron emission tomography tau imaging. Brain. 2016;139:2249–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Maurik, IS, Zwan, MD, Tijms, BM, et al. Interpreting biomarker results in individual patients with mild cognitive impairment in the Alzheimer’s Biomarkers in Daily Practice (ABIDE) Project. JAMA Neurol. 2017.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Handels, RLH, Vos, SJB, Kramberger, MG, et al. Predicting progression to dementia in persons with mild cognitive impairment using cerebrospinal fluid markers. Alzheimers Dement. 2017;13:903–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Handels, RLH, Wimo, A, Dodel, R, et al. Cost-utility of using Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid to predict progression from mild cognitive impairment to dementia. J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;60:1477–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mattsson, N, Andreasson, U, Persson, S, et al. CSF biomarker variability in the Alzheimer’s Association quality control program. Alzheimers Dement. 2013;9:251–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verwey, NA, van der Flier, WM, Blennow, K, et al. A worldwide multicentre comparison of assays for cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Clin Biochem. 2009;46:235–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frisoni, GB, Boccardi, M, Barkhof, F, et al. Strategic roadmap for an early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease based on biomarkers. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16:661–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mattsson, N, Lonneborg, A, Boccardi, M, Blennow, K, Hansson, O, Geneva Task Force for the Roadmap of Alzheimer’s B. Clinical validity of cerebrospinal fluid Abeta42, tau, and phospho-tau as biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease in the context of a structured 5-phase development framework. Neurobiol Aging. 2017;52:196213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teunissen, CE, Otto, M, Engelborghs, S, et al. White paper by the society for CSF analysis and clinical neurochemistry: overcoming barriers in biomarker development and clinical translation. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2018;10:30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simonsen, AH, Herukka, SK, Andreasen, N, et al. Recommendations for CSF AD biomarkers in the diagnostic evaluation of dementia. Alzheimers Dement. 2017;13:274–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olsson, B, Lautner, R, Andreasson, U, et al. CSF and blood biomarkers for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. 2016;15:673–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Llorens, F, Schmitz, M, Ferrer, I, Zerr, I. CSF biomarkers in neurodegenerative and vascular dementias. Prog Neurobiol. 2016;138–140:3653.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teunissen, CE, Parnetti, L. New CSF biomarkers on the block. EMBO Mol Med. 2016;8:1118–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vijverberg, EG, Dols, A, Krudop, WA, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid biomarker examination as a tool to discriminate behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia from primary psychiatric disorders. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2017;7:99106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alcolea, D, Vilaplana, E, Suarez-Calvet, M, et al. CSF sAPPbeta, YKL-40, and neurofilament light in frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Neurology. 2017;89:178–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teunissen, CE, Elias, N, Koel-Simmelink, MJ, et al. Novel diagnostic cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for pathologic subtypes of frontotemporal dementia identified by proteomics. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2016;2:8694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mattsson, N, Insel, PS, Palmqvist, S, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid tau, neurogranin, and neurofilament light in Alzheimer’s disease. EMBO Mol Med. 2016;8:1184–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kishi, T, Matsunaga, S, Oya, K, Ikuta, T, Iwata, N. Protection against brain atrophy by anti-dementia medication in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease: meta-analysis of longitudinal randomized placebo-controlled trials. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2015;18:pvy070.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, HH, Ferris, S, Winblad, B, et al. Effect of rivastigmine on delay to diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease from mild cognitive impairment: the InDDEx study. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6:501–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seltzer, B, Zolnouni, P, Nunez, M, et al. Efficacy of donepezil in early-stage Alzheimer disease: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Arch Neurol. 2004;61:1852–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dubois, B, Padovani, A, Scheltens, P, Rossi, A, Dell’Agnello, G. Timely diagnosis for Alzheimer’s disease: a literature review on benefits and challenges. J Alzheimers Dis. 2016;49:617–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1: Diagnostic workup at Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire du CHU de Québec, a tertiary care memory clinic in Quebec City, QC, Canada.

Figure 1

Table 1: Demographics of the sample

Figure 2

Figure 2: Clinical indications for CSF analysis. A+=amyloid-positive; A−=amyloid-negative; AD=Alzheimer’s disease; aMCI=amnestic mild cognitive impairment; FTD=frontotemporal dementia; PPA=primary progressive aphasia; Psy=Psychiatric disorder.