Gray to White Matter Signal Ratio as a novel biomarker of neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s disease

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAlzheimer’s disease (AD) is characterized neuropathologically by ß‐amyloid (Aß) plaques, hyperphosphorylated tau neurofibrillary tangles, and neurodegeneration which leads to a phenotypically heterogeneous cognitive‐behavioral dementia syndrome. Our understanding of how these neuropathological and neurodegeneration biomarkers relate to each other is still evolving. A relatively new approach to measuring structural brain change, gray matter to white matter signal intensity ratio (GWR), quantifies the signal contrast between these tissue compartments, and has emerged as a promising marker of AD‐related neurodegeneration. We sought to validate GWR as a novel MRI biomarker of neurodegeneration.MethodTwenty‐nine amyloid‐, tau‐, and neurodegeneration positive patients with atypical syndromes of AD (16 Posterior Cortical Atrophy, 10 logopenic variant of Primary Progressive Aphasia, and 3 Amnestic Dysexecutive phenotype) and 24 amyloid‐negative control participants underwent structural MRI, 11C‐Pittsburgh Compound B (PiB) PET, and 18F‐flortaucipir (FTP) PET scans. Whole‐cortex vertex‐wise general linear models (GLM) were created to identify areas of the cerebral cortex where AD patients showed abnormal signal in each modality, and Pearson’s correlation coefficients were computed to examine the strength of bivariate associations between each pair of modalities at the group level. We then constructed linear mixed‐effects models to test the relative contribution of each non‐FTP modality to explaining the variance in regional FTP uptake.ResultWe found that GWR was associated with cortical thickness, tau PET, and amyloid PET, with GWR showing a larger magnitude of abnormality than cortical thickness. We also found that combining GWR, cortical thickness, and amyloid PET better explained observed tau PET signal than using these modalities alone, suggesting that the three imaging biomarkers contribute independently and synergistically to explaining the variance in the distribution of tau pathology.ConclusionWe conclude that GWR is a uniquely sensitive in vivo marker of neurodegenerative change that reflects pathological mechanisms which may occur prior to cortical atrophy. By using all of these imaging biomarkers of AD together, we may be better able to capture, and possibly predict, AD neuropathologic changes in vivo, which we hope will ultimately contribute to better endpoints to evaluate the efficacy of therapeutic interventions as we move toward an era of disease‐modifying treatments for this devastating disease.