Asian Science Citation Index is committed to provide an authoritative, trusted and significant information by the coverage of the most important and influential journals to meet the needs of the global scientific community.  
ASCI Database
308-Lasani Town,
Sargodha Road,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Fax: +92-41-8815544
Contact Via Web
Suggest a Journal
 
Articles by Clifford R. Jack
Total Records ( 11 ) for Clifford R. Jack
  Stephen D. Weigand , Prashanthi Vemuri , Heather J. Wiste , Matthew L. Senjem , Vernon S. Pankratz , Paul S. Aisen , Michael W. Weiner , Ronald C. Petersen , Leslie M. Shaw , John Q. Trojanowski , David S. Knopman and Clifford R. Jack
  Background Positron-emission tomography (PET) imaging of amyloid with Pittsburgh Compound B (PIB) and Aβ42 levels in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF Aβ42) demonstrate a highly significant inverse correlation. Both these techniques are presumed to measure brain Aβ amyloid load. The objectives of this study were to develop a method to transform CSF Aβ42 measures into calculated PIB measures (PIBcalc) of Aβ amyloid load, and to partially validate the method in an independent sample of subjects. Methods In all, 41 subjects from the Alzheimer‘s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) underwent PIB PET imaging and lumbar puncture (LP) at the same time. This sample, referred to as the ”training“ sample (nine cognitively normal subjects, 22 subjects with mild cognitive impairment, and 10 subjects with Alzheimer‘s disease), was used to develop a regression model by which CSF Aβ42 (with apolipoprotein E ɛ4 carrier status as a covariate) was transformed into units of PIB PET (PIBcalc). An independent ”supporting“ sample of 362 ADNI subjects (105 cognitively normal subjects, 164 subjects with mild cognitive impairment, and 93 subjects with Alzheime‘s disease) who underwent LP but not PIB PET imaging had their CSF Aβ42 values converted to PIBcalc. These values were compared with the overall PIB PET distribution found in the ADNI subjects (n = 102). Results A linear regression model demonstrates good prediction of actual PIB PET from CSF Aβ42 measures obtained in the training sample (R2 = 0.77, P < .001). PIBcalc data (derived from CSF Aβ42) in the supporting sample of 362 ADNI subjects who underwent LP but not PIB PET imaging demonstrate group-wise distributions that are highly consistent with the larger ADNI PIB PET distribution and with published PIB PET imaging studies. Conclusion Although the precise parameters of this model are specific for the ADNI sample, we conclude that CSF Aβ42 can be transformed into PIBcalc measures of Aβ amyloid load. Brain Aβ amyloid load can be ascertained at baseline in therapeutic or observational studies by either CSF or amyloid PET imaging and the data can be pooled using well-established multiple imputation techniques that account for the uncertainty in a CSF-based PIBcalc value.
  Giovanni B. Frisoni and Clifford R. Jack
  Hippocampal atrophy is a marker of disease state and progression in Alzheimer‘s disease. The gold standard to measure hippocampal volume is through manual segmentation. A number of protocols to measure hippocampal volume through manual segmentation have been developed, but the marked heterogeneity of anatomical landmarks has given rise to wide variability of volume estimates. With the aim of fostering the use of hippocampal volume in routine clinical settings, an international task force is currently working on developing a harmonized protocol that will resolve and reduce the present heterogeneity. The task force will then validate the harmonized protocol, develop harmonized probabilistic hippocampal maps, and develop illustrative and educational material on the use of the harmonized protocol and maps.
  Clifford R. Jack , Marilyn S. Albert , David S. Knopman , Guy M. McKhann , Reisa A. Sperling , Maria C. Carrillo , Bill Thies and Creighton H. Phelps
  Background Criteria for the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) were established in 1984. A broad consensus now exists that these criteria should be revised to incorporate state-of-the-art scientific knowledge. Methods The National Institute on Aging (NIA) and the Alzheimer's Association sponsored a series of advisory round table meetings in 2009 whose purpose was to establish a process for revising diagnostic and research criteria for AD. The recommendation from these advisory meetings was that three separate work groups should be formed with each assigned the task of formulating diagnostic criteria for one phase of the disease: the dementia phase; the symptomatic, pre-dementia phase; and the asymptomatic, preclinical phase of AD. Results Two notable differences from the AD criteria published in 1984 are incorporation of biomarkers of the underlying disease state and formalization of different stages of disease in the diagnostic criteria. There was a broad consensus within all three workgroups that much additional work is needed to validate the application of biomarkers for diagnostic purposes. In the revised NIA-Alzheimer's Association criteria, a semantic and conceptual distinction is made between AD pathophysiological processes and clinically observable syndromes that result, whereas this distinction was blurred in the 1984 criteria. Conclusions The new criteria for AD are presented in three documents. The core clinical criteria of the recommendations regarding AD dementia and MCI due to AD are intended to guide diagnosis in the clinical setting. However, the recommendations of the preclinical AD workgroup are intended purely for research purposes.
  Guy M. McKhann , David S. Knopman , Howard Chertkow , Howard Chertkow , Clifford R. Jack , Claudia H. Kawas , William E. Klunk , Walter J. Koroshetz , Jennifer J. Manly , Richard Mayeux , Richard C. Mohs , John C. Morris , Martin N. Rossor , Philip Scheltens , Maria C. Carrillo , Bill Thies , Sandra Weintraub and Creighton H. Phelps
  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.
  Reisa A. Sperling , Paul S. Aisen , Laurel A. Beckett , Laurel A. Beckett , Suzanne Craft , Anne M. Fagan , Takeshi Iwatsubo , Clifford R. Jack , Jeffrey Kaye , Thomas J. Montine , Denise C. Park , Eric M. Reiman , Christopher C. Rowe , Eric Siemers , Yaakov Stern , Yaakov Stern , Maria C. Carrillo , Bill Thies , Marcelle Morrison- Bogorad , Molly V. Wagster and Creighton H. Phelps
  The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer‘s Association charged a workgroup with the task of developing criteria for the symptomatic predementia phase of Alzheimer‘s disease (AD), referred to in this article as mild cognitive impairment due to AD. The workgroup developed the following two sets of criteria: (1) core clinical criteria that could be used by healthcare providers without access to advanced imaging techniques or cerebrospinal fluid analysis, and (2) research criteria that could be used in clinical research settings, including clinical trials. The second set of criteria incorporate the use of biomarkers based on imaging and cerebrospinal fluid measures. The final set of criteria for mild cognitive impairment due to AD has four levels of certainty, depending on the presence and nature of the biomarker findings. Considerable work is needed to validate the criteria that use biomarkers and to standardize biomarker analysis for use in community settings.
  Reisa A. Sperling , Clifford R. Jack , Sandra E. Black , Matthew P. Frosch , Steven M. Greenberg , Bradley T. Hyman , Philip Scheltens , Maria C. Carrillo , William Thies , Martin M. Bednar , Ronald S. Black , H. Robert Brashear , Michael Grundman , Eric R. Siemers , Howard H. Feldman and Rachel J. Schindler
  Amyloid imaging related abnormalities (ARIA) have now been reported in clinical trials with multiple therapeutic avenues to lower amyloid-β burden in Alzheimer‘s disease (AD). In response to concerns raised by the Food and Drug Administration, the Alzheimer‘s Association Research Roundtable convened a working group to review the publicly available trial data, attempts at developing animal models, and the literature on the natural history and pathology of related conditions. The spectrum of ARIA includes signal hyperintensities on fluid attenuation inversion recoverysequences thought to represent ”vasogenic edema“ and/or sulcal effusion (ARIA-E), as well as signal hypointensities on GRE/T2∗ thought to represent hemosiderin deposits (ARIA-H), including microhemorrhage and superficial siderosis. The etiology of ARIA remains unclear but the prevailing data support vascular amyloid as a common pathophysiological mechanism leading to increased vascular permeability. The workgroup proposes recommendations for the detection and monitoring of ARIA in ongoing AD clinical trials, as well as directions for future research.
  Christopher Carlson , Wahiba Estergard , Joonmi Oh , Joyce Suhy , Clifford R. Jack , Eric Siemers and Jerome Barakos
  Background Cerebral vasogenic edema (VE) has been reported to occur during antiamyloid immunotherapy. VE may be associated with central nervous system pathology with blood–brain barrier disruptions; however, less is known about the prevalence of naturally occurring VE in patients with Alzheimer‘s disease (AD). Methods Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging sequences were obtained from four ongoing multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials in patients with mild-to-moderate AD. The first set of baseline scans was from patients in volumetric magnetic resonance imaging addenda in the Interrupting Alzheimer's Dementia by EvaluatiNg Treatment of Amyloid PaThologY (IDENTITY) studies examining semagacestat, a γ-secretase inhibitor (cohort 1, n = 621). The second set of baseline scans was from the EXPanding alzhEimer's Disease InvestigaTIONs (EXPEDITION) studies examining solanezumab, an anti-Aβ monoclonal antibody (cohort 2, n = 2141). Readers were blinded to patient-identifying information and future treatment. A third set of baseline scans was from the first 700 patients who underwent protocol-specified magnetic resonance imaging before randomization in the EXPEDITION studies (cohort 3). The analysis used three neuroradiologists: two performed independent primary interpretations and the third was the adjudicator. Readers were blinded to patient information, treatment, protocol, and time point. Results Four cases of asymptomatic VE were detected at baseline/screening. Two VE cases were due to underlying extra-axial mass lesions. The third VE case was associated with numerous microhemorrhages in keeping with cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related inflammation or Aβ-related angiitis. The final VE case demonstrated localized sulcal fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging hyperintensity. No VE was detected in cohort 3 by readers blinded to patient baseline status. Conclusions VE seems to be rare at baseline in patients with AD in clinical trials, 2 of 2762 associated with AD. Additional cohorts should be evaluated to support these findings.
  Clifford R. Jack , Frederik Barkhof , Matt A. Bernstein , Marc Cantillon , Patricia E. Cole , Charles DeCarli , Bruno Dubois , Simon Duchesne , Nick C. Fox , Giovanni B. Frisoni , Harald Hampel , Derek L.G. Hill , Keith Johnson , Jean-Francois Mangin , Philip Scheltens , Adam J. Schwarz , Reisa Sperling , Joyce Suhy , Paul M. Thompson , Michael Weiner and Norman L. Foster
  Background The promise of Alzheimer‘s disease biomarkers has led to their incorporation in new diagnostic criteria and in therapeutic trials; however, significant barriers exist to widespread use. Chief among these is the lack of internationally accepted standards for quantitative metrics. Hippocampal volumetry is the most widely studied quantitative magnetic resonance imaging measure in Alzheimer‘s disease and thus represents the most rational target for an initial effort at standardization. Methods and Results The authors of this position paper propose a path toward this goal. The steps include the following: (1) Establish and empower an oversight board to manage and assess the effort, (2) adopt the standardized definition of anatomic hippocampal boundaries on magnetic resonance imaging arising from the European Alzheimer‘s Disease Centers–Alzheimer‘s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative hippocampal harmonization effort as a reference standard, (3) establish a scientifically appropriate, publicly available reference standard data set based on manual delineation of the hippocampus in an appropriate sample of subjects (Alzheimer‘s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative), and (4) define minimum technical and prognostic performance metrics for validation of new measurement techniques using the reference standard data set as a benchmark. Conclusions Although manual delineation of the hippocampus is the best available reference standard, practical application of hippocampal volumetry will require automated methods. Our intent was to establish a mechanism for credentialing automated software applications to achieve internationally recognized accuracy and prognostic performance standards that lead to the systematic evaluation and then widespread acceptance and use of hippocampal volumetry. The standardization and assay validation process outlined for hippocampal volumetry was envisioned as a template that could be applied to other imaging biomarkers.
  Gloria C. Chiang , Philip S. Insel , Duygu Tosun , Norbert Schuff , Diana Truran- Sacrey , Sky T. Raptentsetsang , Paul M. Thompson , Eric M. Reiman , Clifford R. Jack , Nick C. Fox , William J. Jagust , Danielle J. Harvey , Laurel A. Beckett , Anthony Gamst , Paul S. Aisen , Ron C. Petersen and Michael W. Weiner
  Background The majority of studies relating amyloid pathology with brain volumes have been cross-sectional. Apolipoprotein ɛ4 (APOE ɛ4), a genetic risk factor for Alzheimer‘s disease, is also known to be associated with hippocampal volume loss. No studies have considered the effects of amyloid pathology and APOE ɛ4 together on longitudinal volume loss. Methods We evaluated whether an abnormal level of cerebrospinal fluid beta-amyloid (CSF Aβ) and APOE ɛ4 carrier status were independently associated with greater hippocampal volume loss over 1 year. We then assessed whether APOE ɛ4 status and CSF Aβ acted synergistically, testing the significance of an interaction term in the regression analysis. We included 297 participants: 77 cognitively normal, 144 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 76 with Alzheimer‘s disease. Results An abnormal CSF Aβ level was found to be associated with greater hippocampal volume loss over 1 year in each group. APOE ɛ4 was associated with hippocampal volume loss only in the cognitively normal and MCI groups. APOE ɛ4 carriers with abnormal CSF Aβ in the MCI group acted synergistically to produce disproportionately greater volume loss than noncarriers. Conclusion Baseline CSF Aβ predicts progression of hippocampal volume loss. APOE ɛ4 carrier status amplifies the degree of neurodegeneration in MCI. Understanding the effect of interactions between genetic risk and amyloid pathology will be important in clinical trials and our understanding of the disease process.
  Jon B. Toledo , Estefania Toledo , Michael W. Weiner , Clifford R. Jack , William Jagust , Virginia M.-Y. Lee , Leslie M. Shaw and John Q. Trojanowski
  Background There is epidemiological evidence that cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) also are risk factors for Alzheimer‘s disease, but there is limited information on this from neuropathological studies, and even less from in vivo studies. Therefore, we examined the relationship between CVRF and amyloid-β (Aβ) brain burden measured by Pittsburgh Compound B-positron emission tomography (PiB-PET) studies in the Alzheimer‘s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Methods Ninety-nine subjects from the Alzheimer‘s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort who had a PiB-PET study measure, apolipoprotein E genotyping data, and information available on CVRF (body mass index [BMI], systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure [DBP], and cholesterol and fasting glucose test results) were included. Eighty-one subjects also had plasma cortisol, C-reactive protein, and superoxide dismutase 1 measurements. Stepwise regression models were used to assess the relation between the CVRF and the composite PiB-PET score. Results The first model included the following as baseline variables: age, clinical diagnosis, number of apolipoprotein ɛ4 alleles, BMI (P = .023), and DBP (P = .012). BMI showed an inverse relation with PiB-PET score, and DBP had a positive relation with PiB-PET score. In the second adjusted model, cortisol plasma levels were also associated with PiB-PET score (P = .004). Systolic blood pressure, cholesterol, or impaired fasting glucose were not found to be associated with PiB-PET values. Conclusion In this cross-sectional study, we found an association between Aβ brain burden measured in vivo and DBP and cortisol, indicating a possible link between these CVRF and Aβ burden measured by PiB-PET. These findings highlight the utility of biomarkers to explore potential pathways linking diverse Alzheimer‘s disease risk factors.
  Bradley T. Wyman , Danielle J. Harvey , Karen Crawford , Matt A. Bernstein , Owen Carmichael , Patricia E. Cole , Paul K. Crane , Charles DeCarli , Nick C. Fox , Jeffrey L. Gunter , Derek Hill , Ronald J. Killiany , Chahin Pachai , Adam J. Schwarz , Norbert Schuff , Matthew L. Senjem , Joyce Suhy , Paul M. Thompson , Paul M. Thompson and Clifford R. Jack
  The Alzheimer‘s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) three-dimensional T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) acquisitions provide a rich data set for developing and testing analysis techniques for extracting structural endpoints. To promote greater rigor in analysis and meaningful comparison of different algorithms, the ADNI MRI Core has created standardized analysis sets of data comprising scans that met minimum quality control requirements. We encourage researchers to test and report their techniques against these data. Standard analysis sets of volumetric scans from ADNI-1 have been created, comprising screening visits, 1-year completers (subjects who all have screening, 6- and 12-month scans), 2-year annual completers (screening, 1-year and 2-year scans), 2-year completers (screening, 6-months, 1-year, 18-months [mild cognitive impaired (MCI) only], and 2-year scans), and complete visits (screening, 6-month, 1-year, 18-month [MCI only], 2-year, and 3-year [normal and MCI only] scans). As the ADNI-GO/ADNI-2 data become available, updated standard analysis sets will be posted regularly.
 
 
 
Copyright   |   Desclaimer   |    Privacy Policy   |   Browsers   |   Accessibility