Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorGrøntvedt, Gøril Rolfseng
dc.contributor.authorLauridsen, Camilla
dc.contributor.authorBerge, Guro
dc.contributor.authorWhite, Linda Rosemary
dc.contributor.authorSalvesen, Øyvind
dc.contributor.authorBråthen, Geir
dc.contributor.authorSando, Sigrid Botne
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-19T12:47:23Z
dc.date.available2021-03-19T12:47:23Z
dc.date.created2020-11-30T14:14:22Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn1387-2877
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2734500
dc.description.abstractBackground: The unbiased amyloid, tau, and neurodegeneration (A/T/N) classification is designed to characterize individuals in the Alzheimer continuum and is currently little explored in clinical cohorts. Objective: A retrospective comparison of the A/T/N classification system with the results of a two-year clinical study, with extended follow-up up to 10 years after inclusion. Methods: Patients (n = 102) clinically diagnosed as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) with dementia or amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 61 cognitively healthy control individuals were included. Baseline cerebrospinal fluid core biomarkers for AD (A42, phosphorylated tau, and total tau) were applied to the A/T/N classification using the final clinical diagnosis at extended follow-up as the gold standard. Results: A + T + N+ was a strong predictor for AD dementia, even among cognitively healthy individuals. Amnestic MCI was heterogenous, considering both clinical outcome and distribution within A/T/N. Some individuals with amnestic MCI progressed to clinical AD dementia within all four major A/T/N groups. The highest proportion of progression was among triple positive cases, but progression was also common in individuals with suspected non-Alzheimer pathophysiology (AT + N+), and those with triple negative status. A-T-N- individuals who were cognitively healthy overwhelmingly remained cognitively intact over time, but in amnestic MCI the clinical outcome was heterogenous, including AD dementia, other dementias, and recovery. Conclusion: The A/T/N framework accentuates biomarkers over clinical status. However, when selecting individuals for research, a combination of the two may be necessary since the prognostic value of the A/T/N framework depends on clinical status.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherIOS Pressen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleThe Amyloid, Tau, and Neurodegeneration (A/T/N) Classification Applied to a Clinical Research Cohort with Long-Term Follow-Upen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.source.journalJournal of Alzheimer's Diseaseen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3233/JAD-191227
dc.identifier.cristin1854217
dc.description.localcodeThis article is published online with Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0).en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal