Cohort heterogeneity and AD biomarkers in older adults without significant cognitive impairment: A comparison of U.S. POINTER and ADNI.

Background: A key focus of the U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk (U.S. POINTER) is recruitment of unimpaired older individuals at risk for cognitive decline with heterogeneous characteristics (under‐represented racial and ethnicity groups (URG), family history of cognitive decline, hypertension, geographic diversity), and a subset of individuals undergo PET and MRI. Method: To examine effects of heterogeneity on relationships between risk factors, AD biomarkers (Aß and entorhinal tau PET, hippocampal volume (HV)) and cognition (global, executive function, and memory) were examined from U.S. POINTER neuroimaging participants (N = 602, about 65% of the anticipated total sample) and a subset of Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative participants (N = 503). Neuroimaging data were processed and analyzed using harmonized methods across studies. Some cohort‐specific measurements were standardized using a within‐cohort reference group (Aß‐negative individuals <70yrs and with global CDR = 0). Result: U.S. POINTER imaging participants are younger than those in ADNI (68.6+/‐5.0yrs vs 70.7+/‐4.4yrs), more likely to be female (65% vs 58%) and from URG (27% vs 15%), and had lower education (14.7+/‐3.3yrs vs 16.7+/‐2.3yrs) and higher Framingham Cardiovascular Risk scores (9.9+/‐8.3 vs 7.7+/‐5.3). The groups differed on several AD biomarkers and cognitive measures (Table). In regression models, AD biomarkers were stronger predictors of cognitive performance in ADNI compared to POINTER. Specifically, Aß+ individuals with elevated tau had disproportionately poorer cognitive performance in ADNI, and this relationship remained consistent across cognitive measures (Figure). Conversely, demographic/risk variables were stronger predictors in POINTER. Demographic/risk predictors (age, sex, education, race, and FRS) together explained twice as much variance in global cognition in POINTER compared to ADNI (Adjusted R2 = 29% vs 14%). The addition of AD biomarkers to the model further increased the amount of variance in global cognition explained from 14% to 34% in ADNI, but addition of AD biomarkers did not increase variance explained in the POINTER model. Conclusion: Heterogeneity among study participants appears to influence baseline biomarker‐cognition relationships such that AD biomarkers explain more variability in cognitive performance in ADNI than POINTER. These findings further suggest that cohort characteristics may affect the potential influence of amyloid‐ and tau‐modifying treatments on cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]