Novel results concerning the relationship between CSF biomarkers and morphometry in MCI and AD were found: First, group differences in brain morphometry were seen even after controlling for CSF biomarker levels. Second, longitudinal atrophy over 1 and 2 years was related to CSF biomarker levels in MCI. This relationship was not restricted to the hippocampus and the ventricles. Although not statistically tested, baseline morphometry showed similar predictive power of atrophy as did CSF biomarkers, and MCI patients with above median levels of Aβ42 and below median levels of p-tau showed more atrophy than controls. Finally, brain morphometry better predicted clinical change (CDR-sb) than did CSF biomarkers.
Confirming previous studies, both MR morphometry (
Fennema-Notestine et al., 2009;
Jack et al., 1999;
McEvoy et al., 2009;
Mosconi et al., 2007;
Thompson et al., 2004) and CSF biomarkers (
Dubois et al., 2007;
Goedert and Spillantini, 2006;
Hampel et al., 2008;
Spires-Jones et al., 2009) distinguished NC from MCI and AD. The largest effects were observed for hippocampus and entorhinal cortex. The relationships between CSF and morphometry measures were generally weak. This was unexpected, as a causal relationship between CSF biomarkers and brain atrophy has been suggested (
Arriagada et al., 1992;
de Leon et al., 2006;
Goedert and Spillantini, 2006;
Naslund et al., 2000;
Price and Morris, 1999;
Spires-Jones et al., 2009;
Thal et al., 2002). T-tau was significantly related to entorhinal, inferior and middle temporal cortical thickness, consistent with knowledge that tau-related pathology begins in these regions (
Braak and Braak, 1985;
Mesulam, 1999). However, the relationships were not strong, and no significant relationships were found between t-tau and the hippocampus or amygdala, regions also vulnerable to early tau-related pathology. Relationships between tau, Aβ42, and hippocampal volume have previously been shown (
de Leon et al., 2006;
Fjell et al., 2008), and hippocampal volume has been related to burden of hippocampal neurofibrillary tangles (
Silbert et al., 2003), although discrepant results have been reported (
Schonknecht et al., 2003). While t-tau was modestly related to temporal cortical thickness, Aβ42 was not related to MR baseline morphometry. Individual variability in baseline volumes may be too large to allow consistent detection of effects of CSF biomarkers on hippocampal volume.
It has been suggested that volumetric temporal and hippocampal damage in MCI is secondary to the pathological depositions of Aβ42 and/ or tau pathology (
Arriagada et al., 1992;
de Leon et al., 2006;
Naslund et al., 2000;
Price and Morris, 1999;
Thal et al., 2002). The present data suggest that CSF biomarkers only explain a fraction of the baseline differences in brain morphometry between NC and MCI/ or AD, confirming previous findings with regard to cortical thickness differences in NC vs. MCI (
Fjell et al., 2008). Hence, CSF tau and Aβ42 as documented in CSF are unlikely to represent the main causal mechanism behind the brain morphometric effects seen in MCI and AD. Thus, it is possible that Aβ42 has a role in AD pathology without necessarily preceding brain atrophy (
Lee et al., 2006). It is also interesting to note that the strongest relationship between tau and morphometry measures in MCI was found for the caudate, which is not specifically implicated in AD. Increased tau is also found in other conditions, including fronto-temporal dementia, stroke and healthy aging (
Sjogren et al., 2001).
Stronger relationships between CSF biomarkers and morphometry in MCI were found longitudinally. Aβ42 was the most predictive of brain atrophy, and was the only unique predictor in the surface-based analysis. This analysis indicated a mainly posterior pattern of effects of Aβ42, with strong correlations in lateral occipital, inferior parietal, lateral temporal, and entorhinal cortex. The ROI analyses showed moderate relationships for several areas implicated in AD, including mesial and lateral temporal areas. The relationships with rates of change in the temporal structures were in accordance with known distribution of CSF biomarker pathology in the brain, and were probably partly due to larger atrophy rates here.
The relationships between CSF biomarkers and hippocampal atrophy are mainly in agreement with previous studies. High correlations between 2 year change in p-tau and Aβ42 and change in hippocampal volume in six MCI patients has been reported (
de Leon et al., 2006). Others found correlations between baseline CSF levels of p-tau but not t-tau and longitudinal hippocampal atrophy in 22 AD patients (
Hampel et al., 2005). In a recent publication using data from ADNI, a correlation was found between hippocampal atrophy and baseline levels of Aβ42, but not tau (
Schuff et al., 2009). The relationships between change in hippocampal volume and both t- and p-tau in the present study may be related to the larger sample size. Yet another study did not find any relationship of CSF Aβ42 or tau and whole brain atrophy rate, while p-tau was mildly related to lower atrophy in AD (Sluimer et al., 2008a). However, no regional measures were included. The present study shows regional relationships beyond the medial temporal areas. Aβ42 was significantly related to rate of change in 10 ROIs, with the hippocampus showing the weakest relationship among these. A similar trend was observed for tau. This highlights the importance of using regional measures beyond global brain volumes and the hippocampus when relating AD brain pathology to biomarkers. The observed relationships between CSF biomarkers and ventricular expansion in the present study confirm the results of a previous study using ADNI participants, employing different segmentation methods (
Chou et al., 2009). APOE had an impact on atrophy for selected areas of importance in MCI and AD (hippocampus, amygdala, inferior lateral ventricles), but did not interact with the effects of CSF biomarkers on atrophy. This is in contrast to the hypothesis of APOE ε4 as a factor reducing the ability to cope with illness and damage in the brain, e.g. that ε4 with concurrent changes in CSF biomarkers increases the risk of conversion from MCI to AD (Herukka et al., 2007).
Although high levels of tau, especially p-tau, and low levels of Aβ42 were predictive of brain atrophy, MCI patients with lower p-tau and comparable Aβ42 levels to the controls still showed significantly more atrophy in several brain structures. Effects were especially strong in lateral and medial temporal as well as retrosplenial cortex, which are areas vulnerable to AD pathology. To our knowledge, this evaluation of MCI individuals with levels of CSF biomarkers similar to or better than controls has not been reported previously. An implication is that there are pathological processes associated with MCI and AD causing brain atrophy that cannot be explained by group differences in the CSF biomarkers. One explanation is that CSF biomarker levels are indexing processes that cause or are related to brain atrophy in MCI and AD, but that separate processes exist, causing atrophic changes unrelated to p-tau or Aβ42. Thus, brain atrophy not related to p-tau and Aβ42 may be common in MCI, and additional atrophy is seen in those patients with elevated levels of p-tau or lowered levels of Aβ42. Another possibility is that the atrophy seen in the patients with higher than median levels of Aβ42 and below median levels of p-tau represents other disease mechanisms than the atrophy seen in patients with abnormal levels of p-tau and Aβ42. These patients may develop dementia of a non-AD type. This should be further tested with longitudinal CSF data and clinical follow-up data. An exception from the observed pattern was the lateral ventricles, where most expansion over 2 years could be explained by baseline p-tau and Aβ42. It is likely that the ventricular expansion is related to mechanical pressure moving the borders of the deep WM, e.g. due to normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH), and not brain atrophy per se, as there is some comorbidity of NPH and AD (
Golomb et al., 2000).
Finally, baseline morphometry was more related to clinical change as indexed by CDR-sb than were CSF biomarkers. Previous results have been mixed, where some find CSF biomarker levels to be predictive of future dementia in MCI patients (
Craig-Schapiro et al., 2008). Interestingly, recent studies reported no association between MMSE change and baseline (
Hampel et al., 2005) or change in levels of CSF biomarkers (Sluimer et al., 2008b), while brain atrophy was predictive of MMSE change. In the present study, baseline MR was more predictive of CDR-SB change than CSF biomarkers, suggesting a stronger association between brain atrophy and progression of clinical symptoms than between CSF levels and progression of clinical symptoms. It is possible that CSF biomarkers are more sensitive to transition from NC to MCI than to progression of clinical symptoms within MCI patients.
Conclusion
The results of the present study indicate that differences in CSF biomarker levels could not explain baseline morphometric differences between healthy elderly and patients with MCI or AD. In contrast, levels of CSF biomarkers were related to longitudinal atrophy in widespread areas, not restricted to hippocampus and medial temporal cortex. The relationship between CSF biomarker levels and longitudinal brain change was modest, indicating that other factors contribute to atrophy. Finally, baseline MR morphometry better predicted CDR-sb change than did CSF biomarkers.