Genetic risk for Alzheimer disease affects the brain throughout the lifespan
Citation Manager Formats
Make Comment
See Comments

Neuronal cell death and loss of synapses are hallmarks of the pathology of Alzheimer disease (AD). The incidence of AD increases with age, and both regional and global brain atrophies have been identified as pathological correlates. Thus, AD can, in many respects, be regarded as a paradigmatic neurodegenerative disorder. However, disrupted function of the presenilin genes, the most common cause of early-onset familial AD (FAD), can also affect brain development, including early processes of neuronal migration and morphogenesis.1
Evidence for reduced brain volume has been observed in middle-aged patients with FAD2 and even in infants carrying the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele,3 the main common variant associated with late-onset AD (LOAD). Earlier neuropathologic work had identified neurofibrillary changes characteristic of AD in young adults, leading to the speculation that the brain changes associated with AD may precede the clinical syndrome by up to 50 years.4 Converging evidence thus suggests that AD develops through a protracted process of neuropathologic changes that warrants a lifespan perspective.
The identification of additional common risk factors for LOAD and the development of polygenic risk scores summarizing their cumulative effects has further boosted research into the biological mechanisms of AD genetic risk. In this issue of Neurology® Genetics, Walhovd et al.5 investigated the association between AD polygenic risk (including but not confined to the APOE ε4 variant) and hippocampal volume in 1,181 cognitively healthy people (some of whom contributed multiple scans over a time period of several years) with a wide age range (4–95 years). They confirmed the reduction in hippocampal volume found earlier in a sample of young adults6 and, importantly, demonstrated that it was fairly consistent across age groups. The absence of strong interaction effects with age would suggest that AD polygenic risk mainly leads to an earlier onset of brain ageing (and loss of cognitive reserve) rather than an accelerated ageing process, although more longitudinal data would be needed to confirm this interpretation. What is also interesting about these findings is that, as the authors rightly point out, they are at odds with an antagonistic pleiotropy account of ageing, which posits that genetic variants that are detrimental in later life have a positive effect on fitness earlier in life to remain in the gene pool of a species. At least regarding the brain phenotype of hippocampal volume, there was no evidence of a beneficial effect of AD-related genes earlier in life.
What, then, are the clinical implications of the identification of brain correlates of genetic AD risk across the lifespan? One of the key approaches in the development and evaluation of new treatments is based on the early identification of prospective patients before the onset of clinically manifest symptoms. The biomarkers developed so far have limited clinical utility for AD prediction7 and thus new multimodal approaches, incorporating both genetic risk scores and parameters of neural structure and function, should be welcome. The lifespan focus of the study by Walhovd et al. is particularly useful in this respect. Modifiable risk factors for AD build up over years,8 and recent epidemiologic studies have highlighted the importance of dementia prevention in early life, for example, through the enhancement of cognitive reserve.7 Although we are still far away from any use of hippocampal volume as a clinical proxy for cognitive reserve, the study by Walhovd et al. makes a compelling case for further longitudinal research into links between AD risk and brain structure.
Study funding
No targeted funding reported.
Disclosure
No relevant disclosures. Go to Neurology.org/NG for full disclosures.
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org/NG for full disclosures. Funding information is provided at the end of the article.
See page e506
- Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND), which permits downloading and sharing the work, provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
References
- 1.↵
- Louvi A,
- Sisodia SS,
- Grove EA
- 2.↵
- 3.↵
- Dean DC,
- Jerskey B,
- Chen K, et al
- 4.↵
- 5.↵
- Walhovd KB,
- Fjell AM,
- Sørensen Ø, et al
- 6.↵
- 7.↵
- Livingston G,
- Huntley J,
- Sommerlad A, et al
- 8.↵
- Vos SJB,
- van Boxtel MPJ,
- Schiepers OJG, et al
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
NOTE: All contributors' disclosures must be entered and current in our database before comments can be posted. Enter and update disclosures at http://submit.ng.neurology.org. Exception: replies to comments concerning an article you originally authored do not require updated disclosures.
- Stay timely. Submit only on articles published within the last 8 weeks.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- 200 words maximum.
- 5 references maximum. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- 5 authors maximum. Exception: replies can include all original authors of the article.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.