Skip to main content
Top
Published in:

01-04-2023 | Alzheimer's Disease | Original Research

Longitudinal Exposure—Response Modeling of Multiple Indicators of Alzheimer’s Disease Progression

Authors: D. G. Polhamus, Michael J. Dolton, J. A. Rogers, L. Honigberg, J. Y. Jin, A. Quartino, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI)

Published in: The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease | Issue 2/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Progression in Alzheimer’s disease manifests as changes in multiple biomarker, cognitive, and functional endpoints. Disease progression modeling can be used to integrate these multiple measures into a synthesized metric of where a patient lies within the disease spectrum, allowing for a more dynamic measure over the range of the disease.

Objectives

This study aimed to combine modeling techniques from psychometric research (e.g., item response theory) and pharmacometrics (e.g., hierarchical models) to describe the multivariate longitudinal disease progression for patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease. Additionally, we aimed to extend the subsequent model to make it suitable for clinical trial simulation, with the inclusion of covariates, to explain variability in latent progression (i.e., disease progression) and to aid in the assessment of enrichment strategies.

Design

Multiple longitudinal endpoints in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database were modeled. This model was validated internally using visual predictive checks, and externally by comparing data from the placebo arms of two Phase 2 crenezumab studies, ABBY (NCT01343966) and BLAZE (NCT01397578).

Setting

The Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative began in 2004: the initial 5-year study (ADNI-1) was extended by 2 years in 2009 by a Grand Opportunities grant (ADNI-GO), and in 2011 and 2016 by further competitive renewals of the ADNI-1 grant (ADNI-2 and ADNI-3, respectively). This work studies natural progression data from patients with confirmed Alzheimer’s disease. The Phase 2 ABBY and BLAZE trials evaluated the safety and efficacy of crenezumab in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease.

Participants

From the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative database, 305 subjects who had a baseline diagnosis of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease were included in modeling. From the ABBY and BLAZE studies, 158 patients were included from the studies’ placebo arms.

Measurements

Longitudinal cognitive and functional assessments modeled included the Clinical Dementia Rating (both as Sum of Boxes and individual item scores), the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale — Cognitive Subscale, the Functional Activities Questionnaire, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test. Also included were the imaging variable fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and the following magnetic resonance imaging volumetrics: entorhinal, fusiform, hippocampal, intra-cranial, mid-temporal, ventricular, and whole brain.

Results

Applying item response theory approaches in this longitudinal setting showed clinical assessments informing a common disease scale in the following order (from early disease to late disease): Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Functional Activities Questionnaire, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale — Cognitive Subscale 12, Clinical Dementia Rating — Sum of Boxes, and Mini-Mental State Examination. The Clinical Dementia Rating communication and home-and-hobbies items were most informative at earlier disease stages, while memory, orientation, and personal care informed the disease status at later stages. A clinical trial simulation model was developed and accurately described within-sample longitudinal distribution of endpoints. Simplifying the model to use only baseline age, MMSE, and APOEε4 status as predictors, out-of-sample mean progression of ADAS-Cog and CDR Sum of Boxes in the ABBY and BLAZE placebo arms was accurately described; however, the variability in these endpoints was underpredicted and suggests possibility for further model refinement when extrapolating from the ADNI sample to trial data. Clinical trial simulations were performed to exemplify use of the model to investigate hypothetical disease modification effects on the multivariate, longitudinal progression on the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale — Cognitive Subscale and the Clinical Dementia Rating — Sum of Boxes.

Conclusions

The latent variable structure of item response theory can be extended to capture a variety of scales that are common assessments and indicators of disease status in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease. These models are not intended to support causal inferences, but they do successfully characterize the observed correlation between endpoints over time and result in concise numerical indices of disease status that reflect the totality of evidence from considering the endpoints jointly. As such, the models have utility for a variety of tasks in clinical trial design, including simulation of hypothetical drug effects, interpolation of missing data, and assessment of in-sample information.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Hamasaki T, Evans SR, Asakura K. Design, data monitoring, and analysis of clinical trials with co-primary endpoints: a review. J Biopharm Stat 2018;28:28–51.CrossRefPubMed Hamasaki T, Evans SR, Asakura K. Design, data monitoring, and analysis of clinical trials with co-primary endpoints: a review. J Biopharm Stat 2018;28:28–51.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Rogers JA, Polhamus D, Gillespie WR, et al. Combining patient-level and summary-level data for Alzheimer’s disease modeling and simulation: a β regression meta-analysis. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 2012;39:479–498.CrossRefPubMed Rogers JA, Polhamus D, Gillespie WR, et al. Combining patient-level and summary-level data for Alzheimer’s disease modeling and simulation: a β regression meta-analysis. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 2012;39:479–498.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Ito K, Ahadieh S, Corrigan B, et al. Disease progression meta-analysis model in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 2010;6:39–53.CrossRefPubMed Ito K, Ahadieh S, Corrigan B, et al. Disease progression meta-analysis model in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 2010;6:39–53.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Delor I, Charoin JE, Gieschke R, Retout S, Jacqmin P. Modeling Alzheimer’s disease progression using disease onset time and disease trajectory concepts applied to CDR-SOB scores from ADNI. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol 2013;2:e78.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Delor I, Charoin JE, Gieschke R, Retout S, Jacqmin P. Modeling Alzheimer’s disease progression using disease onset time and disease trajectory concepts applied to CDR-SOB scores from ADNI. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol 2013;2:e78.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Morris JC. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology 1993;43:2412–2414.CrossRefPubMed Morris JC. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology 1993;43:2412–2414.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference O’Bryant SE, Lacritz LH, Hall J, et al. Validation of the new interpretive guidelines for the clinical dementia rating scale sum of boxes score in the national Alzheimer’s coordinating center database. Arch Neurol 2010;67:746–749.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral O’Bryant SE, Lacritz LH, Hall J, et al. Validation of the new interpretive guidelines for the clinical dementia rating scale sum of boxes score in the national Alzheimer’s coordinating center database. Arch Neurol 2010;67:746–749.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Pfeffer RI, Kurosaki TT, Harrah CH Jr, Chance JM, Filos S. Measurement of functional activities in older adults in the community. J Gerontol 1982;37:323–329.CrossRefPubMed Pfeffer RI, Kurosaki TT, Harrah CH Jr, Chance JM, Filos S. Measurement of functional activities in older adults in the community. J Gerontol 1982;37:323–329.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Li D, Iddi S, Thompson WK, et al. Bayesian latent time joint mixed-effects model of progression in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Alzheimers Dement (Amst) 2018;10:657–668.CrossRefPubMed Li D, Iddi S, Thompson WK, et al. Bayesian latent time joint mixed-effects model of progression in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Alzheimers Dement (Amst) 2018;10:657–668.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Ueckert S, Plan EL, Ito K, et al. Improved utilization of ADAS-cog assessment data through item response theory based pharmacometric modeling. Pharm Res 2014;31:2152–2165.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ueckert S, Plan EL, Ito K, et al. Improved utilization of ADAS-cog assessment data through item response theory based pharmacometric modeling. Pharm Res 2014;31:2152–2165.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Miller TM, Balsis S, Lowe DA, Benge JF, Doody RS. Item response theory reveals variability of functional impairment within clinical dementia rating scale stages. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2011;32:362–366.CrossRefPubMed Miller TM, Balsis S, Lowe DA, Benge JF, Doody RS. Item response theory reveals variability of functional impairment within clinical dementia rating scale stages. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2011;32:362–366.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Lowe DA, Balsis S, Miller TM, Benge JF, Doody RS. Greater precision when measuring dementia severity: establishing item parameters for the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2012;34:128–134.CrossRefPubMed Lowe DA, Balsis S, Miller TM, Benge JF, Doody RS. Greater precision when measuring dementia severity: establishing item parameters for the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2012;34:128–134.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Rencher AC, Christensen WF. Methods of multivariate analysis. 2012. Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey.CrossRef Rencher AC, Christensen WF. Methods of multivariate analysis. 2012. Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Vandemeulebroecke M, Bornkamp B, Krahnke T, et al. A longitudinal item response theory model to characterize cognition over time in elderly subjects. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol 2017;6:635–641.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vandemeulebroecke M, Bornkamp B, Krahnke T, et al. A longitudinal item response theory model to characterize cognition over time in elderly subjects. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol 2017;6:635–641.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Leoutsakos JM, Gross AL, Jones RN, Albert MS, Breitner JCS. ‘Alzheimer’s Progression Score’: development of a biomarker summary outcome for AD prevention trials. J Prev Alzheimers Dis 2016;3:229–235.PubMedPubMedCentral Leoutsakos JM, Gross AL, Jones RN, Albert MS, Breitner JCS. ‘Alzheimer’s Progression Score’: development of a biomarker summary outcome for AD prevention trials. J Prev Alzheimers Dis 2016;3:229–235.PubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Roy J, Lin X. Latent variable models for longitudinal data with multiple continuous outcomes. Biometrics 2000;56:1047–1054.CrossRefPubMed Roy J, Lin X. Latent variable models for longitudinal data with multiple continuous outcomes. Biometrics 2000;56:1047–1054.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Tsiatis A, Davidian M. Joint modeling of longitudinal and time-to-event data: an overview. Stat Sin 2004;14:809–834. Tsiatis A, Davidian M. Joint modeling of longitudinal and time-to-event data: an overview. Stat Sin 2004;14:809–834.
19.
go back to reference Proust-Lima C, Amieva H, Jacqmin-Gadda H. Analysis of Multivariate Mixed Longitudinal Data: A Flexible Latent Process Approach. Br J Math Stat Psychol 2013;66:470–487.PubMed Proust-Lima C, Amieva H, Jacqmin-Gadda H. Analysis of Multivariate Mixed Longitudinal Data: A Flexible Latent Process Approach. Br J Math Stat Psychol 2013;66:470–487.PubMed
23.
go back to reference van der Linden WJ, Pashley PJ. Elements of Adaptive Testing. In: van der Linden WJ, Glas CAW (eds) Item Selection and Ability Estimation in Adaptive Testing. 2009. Springer New York, New York, NY, pp 3–30. van der Linden WJ, Pashley PJ. Elements of Adaptive Testing. In: van der Linden WJ, Glas CAW (eds) Item Selection and Ability Estimation in Adaptive Testing. 2009. Springer New York, New York, NY, pp 3–30.
24.
go back to reference Gastonguay MR, French JL, Heitjan DF, et al. Missing data in model-based pharmacometric applications: points to consider. J Clin Pharmacol 2010;20:63S–74S.CrossRef Gastonguay MR, French JL, Heitjan DF, et al. Missing data in model-based pharmacometric applications: points to consider. J Clin Pharmacol 2010;20:63S–74S.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Proust-Lima C, Dartigues J-F, Jacqmin-Gadda H. Joint modeling of repeated multivariate cognitive measures and competing risks of dementia and death: a latent process and latent class approach. Stat Med 2016;35:382–398.CrossRefPubMed Proust-Lima C, Dartigues J-F, Jacqmin-Gadda H. Joint modeling of repeated multivariate cognitive measures and competing risks of dementia and death: a latent process and latent class approach. Stat Med 2016;35:382–398.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Longitudinal Exposure—Response Modeling of Multiple Indicators of Alzheimer’s Disease Progression
Authors
D. G. Polhamus
Michael J. Dolton
J. A. Rogers
L. Honigberg
J. Y. Jin
A. Quartino
Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI)
Publication date
01-04-2023
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease / Issue 2/2023
Electronic ISSN: 2426-0266
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2023.13

Other articles of this Issue 2/2023

The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease 2/2023 Go to the issue

Advances in Alzheimer's

Alzheimer's Disease Independent Medical Education

Alzheimer's research and care is changing rapidly. Keep up with the latest developments from key international conferences, together with expert insights on how to integrate these advances into practice.

This content is intended for healthcare professionals outside of the UK.

Supported by:
  • Lilly
Developed by: Springer Healthcare IME
Learn more