scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Paul S. Aisen

Bio: Paul S. Aisen is an academic researcher from University of Southern California. The author has contributed to research in topics: Alzheimer's disease & Dementia. The author has an hindex of 103, co-authored 513 publications receiving 52996 citations. Previous affiliations of Paul S. Aisen include University College London & Baylor College of Medicine.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A conceptual framework and operational research criteria are proposed, based on the prevailing scientific evidence to date, to test and refine these models with longitudinal clinical research studies and it is hoped that these recommendations will provide a common rubric to advance the study of preclinical AD.
Abstract: The pathophysiological process of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is thought to begin many years before the diagnosis of AD dementia. This long "preclinical" phase of AD would provide a critical opportunity for therapeutic intervention; however, we need to further elucidate the link between the pathological cascade of AD and the emergence of clinical symptoms. The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association convened an international workgroup to review the biomarker, epidemiological, and neuropsychological evidence, and to develop recommendations to determine the factors which best predict the risk of progression from "normal" cognition to mild cognitive impairment and AD dementia. We propose a conceptual framework and operational research criteria, based on the prevailing scientific evidence to date, to test and refine these models with longitudinal clinical research studies. These recommendations are solely intended for research purposes and do not have any clinical implications at this time. It is hoped that these recommendations will provide a common rubric to advance the study of preclinical AD, and ultimately, aid the field in moving toward earlier intervention at a stage of AD when some disease-modifying therapies may be most efficacious.

5,671 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work proposes a model that relates disease stage to AD biomarkers in which Abeta biomarkers become abnormal first, before neurodegenerative biomarkers and cognitive symptoms, and neurodegnerative biomarker become abnormal later, and correlate with clinical symptom severity.
Abstract: Summary Currently available evidence strongly supports the position that the initiating event in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is related to abnormal processing of β-amyloid (Aβ) peptide, ultimately leading to formation of Aβ plaques in the brain. This process occurs while individuals are still cognitively normal. Biomarkers of brain β-amyloidosis are reductions in CSF Aβ 42 and increased amyloid PET tracer retention. After a lag period, which varies from patient to patient, neuronal dysfunction and neurodegeneration become the dominant pathological processes. Biomarkers of neuronal injury and neurodegeneration are increased CSF tau and structural MRI measures of cerebral atrophy. Neurodegeneration is accompanied by synaptic dysfunction, which is indicated by decreased fluorodeoxyglucose uptake on PET. We propose a model that relates disease stage to AD biomarkers in which Aβ biomarkers become abnormal first, before neurodegenerative biomarkers and cognitive symptoms, and neurodegenerative biomarkers become abnormal later, and correlate with clinical symptom severity.

3,953 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a model of the major biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD) was proposed and the authors described the temporal evolution of AD biomarkers in relation to each other and to the onset and progression of clinical symptoms.
Abstract: Summary In 2010, we put forward a hypothetical model of the major biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The model was received with interest because we described the temporal evolution of AD biomarkers in relation to each other and to the onset and progression of clinical symptoms. Since then, evidence has accumulated that supports the major assumptions of this model. Evidence has also appeared that challenges some of our assumptions, which has allowed us to modify our original model. Refinements to our model include indexing of individuals by time rather than clinical symptom severity; incorporation of interindividual variability in cognitive impairment associated with progression of AD pathophysiology; modifications of the specific temporal ordering of some biomarkers; and recognition that the two major proteinopathies underlying AD biomarker changes, amyloid β (Aβ) and tau, might be initiated independently in sporadic AD, in which we hypothesise that an incident Aβ pathophysiology can accelerate antecedent limbic and brainstem tauopathy.

3,197 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a longitudinal study of 128 patients with Alzheimer's disease was conducted, where the authors used the participant's age at baseline assessment and the parent's age to calculate the estimated years from expected symptom onset (age of the participant minus parent's ages at symptom onset).
Abstract: A B S T R AC T BACKGROUND The order and magnitude of pathologic processes in Alzheimer’s disease are not well understood, partly because the disease develops over many years. Autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease has a predictable age at onset and provides an opportunity to determine the sequence and magnitude of pathologic changes that culminate in symptomatic disease. METHODS In this prospective, longitudinal study, we analyzed data from 128 participants who underwent baseline clinical and cognitive assessments, brain imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood tests. We used the participant’s age at baseline assessment and the parent’s age at the onset of symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease to calculate the estimated years from expected symptom onset (age of the participant minus parent’s age at symptom onset). We conducted cross-sectional analyses of baseline data in relation to estimated years from expected symptom onset in order to determine the relative order and magnitude of pathophysiological changes. RESULTS Concentrations of amyloid-beta (Aβ)42 in the CSF appeared to decline 25 years before expected symptom onset. Aβ deposition, as measured by positron-emission tomography with the use of Pittsburgh compound B, was detected 15 years before expected symptom onset. Increased concentrations of tau protein in the CSF and an increase in brain atrophy were detected 15 years before expected symptom onset. Cerebral hypometabolism and impaired episodic memory were observed 10 years before expected symptom onset. Global cognitive impairment, as measured by the Mini–Mental State Examination and the Clinical Dementia Rating scale, was detected 5 years before expected symptom onset, and patients met diagnostic criteria for dementia at an average of 3 years after expected symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS We found that autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease was associated with a series of pathophysiological changes over decades in CSF biochemical markers of Alzheimer’s disease, brain amyloid deposition, and brain metabolism as well as progressive cognitive impairment. Our results require confirmation with the use of longitudinal data and may not apply to patients with sporadic Alzheimer’s disease. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others; DIAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00869817.)

2,907 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Develop a cerebrospinal fluid biomarker signature for mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) in Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) subjects.
Abstract: If the clinical diagnosis of probable AD is imprecise with accuracy rates of approximately 90% or lower using established consensus criteria for probable AD, but definite AD requires autopsy confirmation, it is not surprising that diagnostic accuracy is lower at early and presymptomatic stages of AD.1–4 It is believed that the development of full-blown AD takes place over an approximately 20-year prodromal period, but this is difficult to determine in the absence of biomarkers that reliably signal the onset of nascent disease before the emergence of measurable cognitive impairments. Because intervention with disease-modifying therapies for AD is likely to be most efficacious before significant neurodegeneration has occurred, there is an urgent need for biomarker-based tests that enable a more accurate and early diagnosis of AD.5–7 Moreover, such tests could also improve monitoring AD progression, evaluation of new AD therapies, and enrichment of AD cohorts with specific subsets of AD subjects in clinical trials. The defining lesions of AD are neurofibrillary tangles and senile plaques formed, respectively, by neuronal accumulations of abnormal hyperphosphorylated tau filaments and extracellular deposits of amyloid β (Aβ) fibrils, mostly the 1 to 42 peptide (Aβ1-42), the least soluble of the known Aβ peptides produced from Aβ precursor protein by the action of various peptidases.1–3 Hence, for these and other reasons summarized in consensus reports on AD biomarkers, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), total tau (t-tau), and Aβ were identified as being among the most promising and informative AD biomarkers.5,6 Increased levels of tau in CSF are thought to occur after its release from damaged and dying neurons that harbor dystrophic tau neurites and tangles, whereas reduced CSF levels of Aβ1-42 are believed to result from large-scale accumulation of this least soluble of Aβ peptides into insoluble plaques in the AD brain. The combination of increased CSF concentrations of t-tau and phosphotau (p-tau) species and decreased concentrations of Aβ1-42 are considered to be a pathological CSF biomarker signature that is diagnostic for AD.5,6,8,9 Notably, recent studies have provided compelling preliminary data to suggest that this combination of CSF tau and Aβ biomarker changes may predict the conversion to AD in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subjects.10 Thus, an increase in levels of CSF tau associated with a decline in levels of CSF Aβ1-42 may herald the onset of AD before it becomes clinically manifest. However, before the utility of CSF Aβ1-42 and tau concentrations for diagnosis of AD can be established, it is critical to standardize the methodology for their measurement.5–8,10 For example, among the published studies of CSF tau and Aβ, there is considerable variability in the observed levels of these analytes, as well as their diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. This is attributable to variability in analytical methodology standardization and other factors that differ between studies of the same CSF analytes in similar but not identical cohorts.5–7 The Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) was launched in 2004 to address these and other limitations in AD biomarkers (see reviews in Shaw and colleagues7 and Mueller and coauthors,11 and the ADNI Web site [http://www.adni-info.org/index] where the ADNI grant and all ADNI data are posted for public access). To this end, the Biomarker Core of ADNI conducts studies on ADNI-derived CSF samples to measure CSF Aβ1-42, t-tau, and p-tau (tau phosphorylated at threonine181 [p-tau181p]) in standardized assays. Evaluation of CSF obtained at baseline evaluation of 416 of the 819 ADNI subjects is now complete, and we report here our findings on the performance of these tests using a standardized multiplex immunoassay system that measures the biomarkers simultaneously in the same sample aliquot in ADNI subjects and in an independent cohort of autopsy-confirmed AD cases.

1,912 citations


Cited by
More filters
28 Jul 2005
TL;DR: PfPMP1)与感染红细胞、树突状组胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用,在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作�ly.
Abstract: 抗原变异可使得多种致病微生物易于逃避宿主免疫应答。表达在感染红细胞表面的恶性疟原虫红细胞表面蛋白1(PfPMP1)与感染红细胞、内皮细胞、树突状细胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用,在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作用。每个单倍体基因组var基因家族编码约60种成员,通过启动转录不同的var基因变异体为抗原变异提供了分子基础。

18,940 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The workgroup sought to ensure that the revised criteria would be flexible enough to be used by both general healthcare providers without access to neuropsychological testing, advanced imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid measures, and specialized investigators involved in research or in clinical trial studies who would have these tools available.
Abstract: The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of revising the 1984 criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. The workgroup sought to ensure that the revised criteria would be flexible enough to be used by both general healthcare providers without access to neuropsychological testing, advanced imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid measures, and specialized investigators involved in research or in clinical trial studies who would have these tools available. We present criteria for all-cause dementia and for AD dementia. We retained the general framework of probable AD dementia from the 1984 criteria. On the basis of the past 27 years of experience, we made several changes in the clinical criteria for the diagnosis. We also retained the term possible AD dementia, but redefined it in a manner more focused than before. Biomarker evidence was also integrated into the diagnostic formulations for probable and possible AD dementia for use in research settings. The core clinical criteria for AD dementia will continue to be the cornerstone of the diagnosis in clinical practice, but biomarker evidence is expected to enhance the pathophysiological specificity of the diagnosis of AD dementia. Much work lies ahead for validating the biomarker diagnosis of AD dementia.

13,710 citations

01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care.
Abstract: XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

9,618 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Ronald C. Petersen1
TL;DR: It is suggested that the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment can be made in a fashion similar to the clinical diagnoses of dementia and AD, and an algorithm is presented to assist the clinician in identifying subjects and subclassifying them into the various types of MCI.
Abstract: The concept of cognitive impairment intervening between normal ageing and very early dementia has been in the literature for many years. Recently, the construct of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has been proposed to designate an early, but abnormal, state of cognitive impairment. MCI has generated a great deal of research from both clinical and research perspectives. Numerous epidemiological studies have documented the accelerated rate of progression to dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD) in MCI subjects and certain predictor variables appear valid. However, there has been controversy regarding the precise definition of the concept and its implementation in various clinical settings. Clinical subtypes of MCI have been proposed to broaden the concept and include prodromal forms of a variety of dementias. It is suggested that the diagnosis of MCI can be made in a fashion similar to the clinical diagnoses of dementia and AD. An algorithm is presented to assist the clinician in identifying subjects and subclassifying them into the various types of MCI. By refining the criteria for MCI, clinical trials can be designed with appropriate inclusion and exclusion restrictions to allow for the investigation of therapeutics tailored for specific targets and populations.

6,382 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A conceptual framework and operational research criteria are proposed, based on the prevailing scientific evidence to date, to test and refine these models with longitudinal clinical research studies and it is hoped that these recommendations will provide a common rubric to advance the study of preclinical AD.
Abstract: The pathophysiological process of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is thought to begin many years before the diagnosis of AD dementia. This long "preclinical" phase of AD would provide a critical opportunity for therapeutic intervention; however, we need to further elucidate the link between the pathological cascade of AD and the emergence of clinical symptoms. The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association convened an international workgroup to review the biomarker, epidemiological, and neuropsychological evidence, and to develop recommendations to determine the factors which best predict the risk of progression from "normal" cognition to mild cognitive impairment and AD dementia. We propose a conceptual framework and operational research criteria, based on the prevailing scientific evidence to date, to test and refine these models with longitudinal clinical research studies. These recommendations are solely intended for research purposes and do not have any clinical implications at this time. It is hoped that these recommendations will provide a common rubric to advance the study of preclinical AD, and ultimately, aid the field in moving toward earlier intervention at a stage of AD when some disease-modifying therapies may be most efficacious.

5,671 citations