RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Sensitivity of the African Neuropsychology Battery Memory Subtests and Learning Slopes in Discriminating APOE 4 and Amyloid Pathology in Adult Individuals in the Democratic Republic of Congo
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.10.05.23296598
DO 10.1101/2023.10.05.23296598
A1 Ikanga, Jean
A1 Patrick, Sarah D.
A1 Schwinne, Megan
A1 Patel, Saranya Sundaram
A1 Epenge, Emmanuel
A1 Gikelekele, Guy
A1 Tshengele, Nathan
A1 Kavugho, Immaculee
A1 Mampunza, Samuel
A1 Yarasheski, Kevin E.
A1 Teunissen, Charlotte E.
A1 Stringer, Anthony
A1 Levey, Allan
A1 Rojas, Julio C.
A1 Chan, Brandon
A1 Lago, Argentina Lario
A1 Kramer, Joel H.
A1 Boxer, Adam L.
A1 Jeromin, Andreas
A1 Alonso, Alvaro
A1 Spencer, Robert J.
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/10/05/2023.10.05.23296598.abstract
AB Background The current study examined the sensitivity of two memory subtests and their corresponding learning slope metrics derived from the African Neuropsychology Battery (ANB) to detect amyloid pathology and APOEε4 status in adults from Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.Methods 85 participants were classified for the presence of β-amyloid pathology and based on allelic presence of APOEε4. All participants were screened using CSID and AQ, underwent verbal and visuospatial memory testing from ANB, and provided blood samples for plasma Aβ42, Aβ40, and APOE proteotype. Pearson correlation, linear and logistic regression were conducted to compare amyloid pathology and APOEε4 status with derived learning scores, including initial learning, raw learning score, learning over trials, and learning ratio.Results Our sample included 35 amyloid positive and 44 amyloid negative individuals as well as 42 without and 39 with APOEε4. All ROC AUC ranges for the prediction of amyloid pathology based on learning scores were low, ranging between 0.56-0.70 (95% CI ranging from 0.44-0.82). The sensitivity of all the scores ranged between 54.3-88.6, with some learning metrics demonstrating good sensitivity. Regarding APOEε4 prediction, all AUC values ranged between 0.60-0.69, with all sensitivity measures ranging between 53.8-89.7. There were minimal differences in the AUC values across learning slope metrics, largely due to the lack of ceiling effects in this sample.Discussion This study demonstrates that some ANB memory subtests and learning slope metrics can discriminate those that are normal from those with amyloid pathology and those with and without APOEε4, consistent with findings reported in Western populations.Competing Interest StatementKEY is employed by and receives equity compensation from C2N Diagnostics, LLC. All other authors have no conflict of interest to report.Funding StatementThis study was supported by grants AARG-19-61778701 and P30AG066511-02S1 from the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Alonso was supported by NIH/NHLBI grant K24HL148521 and NIH/NIA grant P30AG066511. C2N Diagnostics analyses were supported by the NIH (grant No. R44 AG059489), BrightFocus (grant No. CA2016636), The Gerald and Henrietta Rauenhorst Foundation, and the Alzheimers Drug Discovery Foundation (grant No. GC-201711-2013978).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was approved by the Ethics Committee and Institutional Review Boards of the University of Kinshasa.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe data supporting the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical reasons.