Brian S Appleby | PubMed Health

PubMed2026

Mortality of Individuals With PRNP Variants Associated With Prion Disease in the United States, 1998-2024.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To characterize the survival of individuals with pathogenic PRNP variants-including to estimate annual hazards, to judge the accuracy of previously reported survival data, and to evaluate the utility of public record searches in determining vital status. METHODS: In this single-center cohort study, we gathered data on individuals who received positive antemortem PRNP genetic tests at the US National Prion Disease Pathology Surveillance Center (NPDPSC), including both diagnostic tests in symptomatic individuals, and predictive tests in asymptomatic individuals. Genetic test and autopsy results were queried from the NPDPSC database, and public record searches were conducted using online tools. RESULTS: Four hundred four individuals received positive genetic test results. Of 206 cases symptomatic at the time of genetic testing, 188 are likely now deceased based on typical disease duration for their genetic variants. Combined autopsy and public record searches in combination confirmed 174 of these deaths, for an estimated 92.6% sensitivity. We evaluated the age-dependent penetrance of the reportedly highly penetrance variants D178N and E200K and the reportedly low-penetrance variant V210I. Among 99 initially asymptomatic individuals with the pathogenic E200K variant, more than 936 person-years of follow-up, 18 deaths were observed, significantly fewer than 27.4 expected according to life tables based on retrospective data. The age-dependent penetrance of E200K calculated from these longitudinal data was significantly lower than that from retrospective data, with 69% penetrance by age 80 and a median age at death of 75. For the pathogenic D178N variant, the median age at death was 57, which was numerically later, but not significantly different from, that seen in retrospective data. For V210I, just 2 deaths occurred, both after age 90, consistent with minimal penetrance. DISCUSSION: Our data support high penetrance of PRNP D178N and E200K variants and low penetrance of V210I. For E200K, the age at onset distribution appears to be shifted slightly later, and lifetime risk slightly lower, than previously reported. Autopsy data and public death records in combination were sensitive and concordant for determining long-term outcomes, but additional prospective data should be gathered to support future preventive trials.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2025

Comprehensive cross-sectional and longitudinal comparisons of plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein and neurofilament light across FTD spectrum disorders.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic development for frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is hindered by the lack of biomarkers that inform susceptibility/risk, prognosis, and the underlying causative pathology. Blood glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) has garnered attention as a FTD biomarker. However, investigations of GFAP in FTD have been hampered by symptomatic and histopathologic heterogeneity and small cohort sizes contributing to inconsistent findings. Therefore, we evaluated plasma GFAP as a FTD biomarker and compared its performance to that of neurofilament light (NfL) protein, a leading FTD biomarker. METHODS: We availed ARTFL LEFFTDS Longitudinal Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ALLFTD) study resources to conduct a comprehensive cross-sectional and longitudinal examination of the susceptibility/risk, prognostic, and predictive performance of GFAP and NfL in the largest series of well-characterized presymptomatic FTD mutation carriers and participants with sporadic or familial FTD syndromes. Utilizing single molecule array technology, we measured GFAP and NfL in plasma from 161 controls, 127 presymptomatic mutation carriers, 702 participants with a FTD syndrome, and 67 participants with mild behavioral and/or cognitive changes. We used multivariable linear regression and Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for co-variates to examine the biomarker utility of baseline GFAP and NfL concentrations or their rates of change. RESULTS: Compared to controls, GFAP and NfL were elevated in each FTD syndrome but GFAP, unlike NfL, poorly discriminated controls from participants with mild symptoms. Similarly, both baseline GFAP and NfL were higher in presymptomatic mutation carriers who later phenoconverted, but NfL better distinguished non-converters from phenoconverters. We additionally observed that GFAP and NfL were associated with disease severity indicators and survival, but NfL far outperformed GFAP. Nevertheless, we validated findings that the GFAP/NfL ratio may discriminate frontotemporal lobar degeneration with tau versus TDP-43 pathology. CONCLUSIONS: Our head-to-head comparison of plasma GFAP and NfL as biomarkers for FTD indicate that NfL consistently outmatched GFAP as a prognostic and predictive biomarker for participants with a FTD syndrome, and as a susceptibility/risk biomarker for people at genetic risk of FTD. Our findings underscore the need to include leading biomarkers in investigations evaluating new biomarkers if the field is to fully ascertain their performance and clinical value.

Humans↗