Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder marked by cognitive decline and memory impairment. Identifying early markers of AD is critical for timely diagnosis and intervention.
Objective
This study aimed to characterize the neuropsychological and pathological features of cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals who later progressed to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or AD, referred to as At-Risk CU. The goal was to support accurate staging and inform early therapeutic strategies.
Methods
Participants were categorized into CU, At-Risk CU, MCI, and AD groups. Data analyses focused on neuroimaging scans, neuropsychological assessments, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (including Aβ1–40/Aβ1–42 and p-Tau/t-Tau), and APOE genotypes. Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) was employed to assess gray matter (GM) volume and white matter (WM) integrity. Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate group differences and associations.
Results
VBM revealed progressive GM atrophy and WM disruptions across the continuum from CU to At-Risk CU, MCI, and AD, particularly in the hippocampus and adjacent regions. Neuropsychological assessments showed significant cognitive decline across stages, while dynamic changes in CSF biomarkers in At-Risk CU suggested compensatory mechanisms. The APOE ε4 allele was strongly associated with AD progression, whereas the ε2 allele demonstrated protective effects. GM volume was significantly correlated with ADAS11 and ADAS13 scores.
Conclusions
This study identifies At-Risk CU as a distinct and clinically meaningful stage in AD progression, marked by structural, cognitive, and biomarker alterations. Integrating neuropsychological assessments, neuroimaging, and CSF biomarkers may facilitate early detection and enable targeted interventions to improve outcomes for individuals at elevated risk of AD.
MonteiroARBarbosaDJRemiaoF, et al.Alzheimer's disease: insights and new prospects in disease pathophysiology, biomarkers and disease-modifying drugs. Biochem Pharmacol2023; 211: 115522.
2.
NoelRLGormanSLBattsAJ, et al.Getting ahead of Alzheimer’s disease: early intervention with focused ultrasound. Front Neurosci2023; 17: 1229683.
3.
ValenzaMScuderiC. How useful are biomarkers for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease and especially for its therapy?Neural Regen Res2022; 17: 2205–2207.
4.
JackCRAndrewsJSBeachTG, et al.Revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer's disease: Alzheimer's Association Workgroup. Alzheimers Dement2024; 20: 5143–5169.
5.
BattistaPSalvatoreCBerlingeriM, et al.Artificial intelligence and neuropsychological measures: the case of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurosci Biobehav Rev2020; 114: 211–228.
6.
LiuJvan BeusekomHBuX-L, et al.Preserving cognitive function in patients with Alzheimer's disease: the Alzheimer's disease neuroprotection research initiative (ADNRI). Neuroprotection2023; 1: 84–98.
7.
DuboisBvon ArnimCABurnieN, et al.Biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease: role in early and differential diagnosis and recognition of atypical variants. Alzheimers Res Ther2023; 15: 175.
8.
ZhaoMYangJChengH, et al.Risk AD classification by using ensemble 3D DenseNets based on multi-modal data. In: Proc. SPIE 13709, Seventeenth International Conference on Digital Image Processing (ICDIP 2025), 22 July 2025, pp.137090C. 10.1117/12.3073560
9.
KraguljacNVLahtiAC. Neuroimaging as a window into the pathophysiological mechanisms of schizophrenia. Front Psychiatry2021; 12: 613764.
10.
PiniLPievaniMBocchettaM, et al.Brain atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease and aging. Ageing Res Rev2016; 30: 25–48.
11.
ChandraADervenoulasGPolitisM, et al.Magnetic resonance imaging in Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. J Neurol2019; 266: 1293–1302.
12.
MisraCFanYDavatzikosC. Baseline and longitudinal patterns of brain atrophy in MCI patients, and their use in prediction of short-term conversion to AD: results from ADNI. Neuroimage2009; 44: 1415–1422.
13.
FanYBatmanghelichNClarkCM, et al.Spatial patterns of brain atrophy in MCI patients, identified via high-dimensional pattern classification, predict subsequent cognitive decline. Neuroimage2008; 39: 1731–1743.
14.
LiHHabesMWolkDA, et al.A deep learning model for early prediction of Alzheimer's disease dementia based on hippocampal magnetic resonance imaging data. Alzheimers Dement2019; 15: 1059–1070.
15.
LiHFanY. Early prediction of Alzheimer’s disease dementia based on baseline hippocampal MRI and 1-year follow-up cognitive measures using deep recurrent neural networks. In: 2019 IEEE 16th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI), 2019, pp.368–371: IEEE.
16.
LiXCoyleDMaguireL, et al.Gray matter concentration and effective connectivity changes in Alzheimer’s disease: a longitudinal structural MRI study. Neuroradiology2011; 53: 733–748.
17.
KangDZhaoMChengH. Brain morphological representation and classification of early AD based on attention densely connected network. J Chongqing Univ Posts Telecommun2024; 19: 716–728.
18.
SiddiquiTGWhitfieldTPraharajuSJ, et al.Magnetic resonance imaging in stable mild cognitive impairment, prodromal Alzheimer’s disease, and prodromal dementia with Lewy bodies. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2021; 49: 583–588.
19.
FalconCTucholkaAMonté-RubioGC, et al.Longitudinal structural cerebral changes related to core CSF biomarkers in preclinical Alzheimer's disease: a study of two independent datasets. Neuroimage Clin2018; 19: 190–201.
20.
RiverolMRíos-RiveraMMImaz-AguayoL, et al.Structural neuroimaging changes associated with subjective cognitive decline from a clinical sample. Neuroimage Clin2024; 42: 103615.
21.
LiuSLuoXChongJSX, et al.Brain structure, amyloid, and behavioral features for predicting clinical progression in subjective cognitive decline. Hum Brain Mapp2024; 45: e26765.
22.
PanzaFLozuponeMLogroscinoG, et al.A critical appraisal of amyloid-β-targeting therapies for Alzheimer disease. Nat Rev Neurol2019; 15: 73–88.
23.
CaiWWuTChenN. The amyloid-beta clearance: from molecular targets to glial and neural cells. Biomolecules2023; 13: 313.
24.
TiwariSAtluriVKaushikA, et al.Alzheimer’s disease: pathogenesis, diagnostics, and therapeutics. Int J Nanomed2019; 14: 5541–5554.
25.
MonteiroARBarbosaDJRemiãoF, et al.Alzheimer’s disease: insights and new prospects in disease pathophysiology, biomarkers and disease-modifying drugs. Biochem Pharmacol2023; 211: 115522.
26.
HainesJL. Alzheimer disease: perspectives from epidemiology and genetics. J Law Med Ethics2018; 46: 694–698.
BejaninASchonhautDRLa JoieR, et al.Tau pathology and neurodegeneration contribute to cognitive impairment in Alzheimer’s disease. Brain2017; 140: 3286–3300.
29.
ChangC-WShaoEMuckeL. Tau: enabler of diverse brain disorders and target of rapidly evolving therapeutic strategies. Science2021; 371: eabb8255.
30.
HuangSWangY-JGuoJ. Biofluid biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease: progress, problems, and perspectives. Neurosci Bull2022; 38: 677–691.
31.
WangX-YLiMLuZ-M. Application guidelines and research progress of biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease. Chin J Prev Med2022; 56: 262–269.
32.
BuscheMAHymanBT. Synergy between amyloid-β and tau in Alzheimer’s disease. Nat Neurosci2020; 23: 1183–1193.
33.
ChételatGArbizuJBarthelH, et al.Amyloid-PET and 18F-FDG-PET in the diagnostic investigation of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias. Lancet Neurol2020; 19: 951–962.
34.
BoonBDBulkMJonkerAJ, et al.The coarse-grained plaque: a divergent aβ plaque-type in early-onset Alzheimer’s disease. Acta Neuropathol2020; 140: 811–830.
35.
BaoWJiaHFinnemaS, et al.PET Imaging for early detection of Alzheimer’s disease: from pathologic to physiologic biomarkers. PET Clin2017; 12: 329–350.
36.
HanssonOLehmannSOttoM, et al.Advantages and disadvantages of the use of the CSF Amyloid β (Aβ) 42/40 ratio in the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Res Ther2019; 11: 34.
37.
MofradSALundervoldAJVikA, et al.Cognitive and MRI trajectories for prediction of Alzheimer’s disease. Sci Rep2021; 11: 2122.
38.
BritoDVCEstevesFRajadoAT, et al.Assessing cognitive decline in the aging brain: lessons from rodent and human studies. NPJ Aging Mech Dis2023; 9: 11.
39.
PrinceJBDavisHLTanJ, et al.Cognitive and neuroscientific perspectives of healthy ageing. Neurosci Biobehav Rev2024; 161: 105649.
40.
HaradaCNNatelson LoveMCTriebelKL. Normal cognitive aging. Clin Geriatr Med2013; 29: 737–752.
41.
TenchovRSassoJMZhouQA. Alzheimer's disease: exploring the landscape of cognitive decline. ACS Chem Neurosci2024; 15: 3800–3827.
42.
Anna-MariyaKBaysRBSaritaL. Working memory and executive function decline across normal aging, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease. Biomed Res Int2015; 2015: 748212.
43.
JiaJXuJLiuJ, et al.Comprehensive management of daily living activities, behavioral and psychological symptoms, and cognitive function in patients with Alzheimer's disease: a Chinese consensus on Alzheimer's disease. Neurosci Bull2021; 37: 1025–1038.
44.
CasalettoKBHeatonRK. Neuropsychological assessment: past and future. J Int Neuropsychol Soc2017; 23: 778–790.
45.
FiorilloASokhadzeESampognaG, et al.Neuropsychological and neurophysiological assessment. In: TasmanARibaMBAlarcónRD (eds) Tasman’s psychiatry. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland AG, 2024, pp.1253–1283.
46.
GoldBTPowellDKAndersenAH, et al.Alterations in multiple measures of white matter integrity in normal women at high risk for Alzheimer's disease. Neuroimage2010; 52: 1487–1494.
47.
MarquiéMGarcía-GutiérrezFOrellanaA, et al.The synergic effect of AT (N) profiles and depression on the risk of conversion to dementia in patients with mild cognitive impairment. Int J Mol Sci2023; 24: 1371.
48.
LeoniV. The effect of apolipoprotein E (ApoE) genotype on biomarkers of amyloidogenesis, tau pathology and neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease. Clin Chem Lab Med2011; 49: 375–383.
49.
SunY-YWangZHuangH-C. Roles of apoE4 on the pathogenesis in Alzheimer’s disease and the potential therapeutic approaches. Cell Mol Neurobiol2023; 43: 3115–3136.
50.
TroutwineBRHamidLLysakerCR, et al.Apolipoprotein E and Alzheimer's disease. Acta Pharm Sin B2022; 12: 496–510.
51.
CorderEHSaundersAMStrittmatterWJ, et al.Gene dose of apolipoprotein E type 4 allele and the risk of Alzheimer's disease in late onset families. Science1993; 261: 921–923.
52.
YamazakiYZhaoNCaulfieldTR, et al.Apolipoprotein E and Alzheimer disease: pathobiology and targeting strategies. Nat Rev Neurol2019; 15: 501–518.
53.
BlumenfeldJYipOKimMJ, et al.Cell type-specific roles of APOE4 in Alzheimer disease. Nat Rev Neurosci2024; 25: 91–110.
54.
LengFEdisonP. Neuroinflammation and microglial activation in Alzheimer disease: where do we go from here?Nat Rev Neurol2021; 17: 157–172.
55.
ChaiABLamHHJKockxM, et al.Apolipoprotein E isoform-dependent effects on the processing of Alzheimer's amyloid-β. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Biol Lipids2021; 1866: 158980.
56.
Saint-JalmesMFedyashovVBeckD, et al.Disease progression modelling of Alzheimer’s disease using probabilistic principal components analysis. Neuroimage2023; 278: 120279.
57.
FolsteinMFFolsteinSEMcHughPR. Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res1975; 12: 189–198.
58.
VelayudhanLRyuS-HRaczekM, et al.Review of brief cognitive tests for patients with suspected dementia. Int Psychogeriatr2014; 26: 1247–1262.
59.
YangY-WHsuK-CWeiC-Y, et al.Operational determination of subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia using sum of boxes of the clinical dementia rating scale. Front Aging Neurosci2021; 13: 705782.
60.
WesselsAMDowsettSSimsJ. Detecting treatment group differences in Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials: a comparison of Alzheimer’s disease assessment scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) and the clinical dementia rating-sum of boxes (CDR-SB). J Prev Alzheimers Dis2018; 5: 15–20.
61.
KueperJKSpeechleyMMontero-OdassoM. The Alzheimer’s disease assessment scale–cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog): modifications and responsiveness in pre-dementia populations. a narrative review. J Alzheimers Dis2018; 63: 423–444.
62.
SamtaniMNXuSXRussuA, et al.Alzheimer's disease assessment scale-cognitive 11-item progression model in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease trials of bapineuzumab. Alzheimers Dement (N Y)2015; 1: 157–169.
63.
MolnarFJMan-Son-HingMFergussonD. Systematic review of measures of clinical significance employed in randomized controlled trials of drugs for dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc2009; 57: 536–546.
64.
Müller-ThomsenTArltSMannU, et al.Detecting depression in Alzheimer’s disease: evaluation of four different scales. Arch Clin Neuropsychol2005; 20: 271–276.
65.
PapaliagkasVKalinderiKVareltzisP, et al.CSF Biomarkers in the early diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Mol Sci2023; 24: 8976.
66.
AshburnerJ. A fast diffeomorphic image registration algorithm. Neuroimage2007; 38: 95–113.
67.
Tzourio-MazoyerNLandeauBPapathanassiouD, et al.Automated anatomical labeling of activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI single-subject brain. Neuroimage2002; 15: 273–289.
68.
MoriSWakanaSVan ZijlPC, et al.MRI atlas of human white matter. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2005.
69.
NakazawaTOharaTHirabayashiN, et al.Multiple-region grey matter atrophy as a predictor for the development of dementia in a community: the Hisayama Study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2022; 93: 263–271.
70.
van de MortelLAThomasRMvan WingenGA, et al.Grey matter loss at different stages of cognitive decline: a role for the thalamus in developing Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis2021; 83: 705–720.
71.
ThompsonPMHayashiKMDe ZubicarayG, et al.Dynamics of gray matter loss in Alzheimer's disease. J Neurosci2003; 23: 994–1005.
72.
SeghierML. The angular gyrus: multiple functions and multiple subdivisions. Neuroscientist2013; 19: 43–61.
73.
BakkourAMorrisJCWolkDA, et al.The effects of aging and Alzheimer's disease on cerebral cortical anatomy: specificity and differential relationships with cognition. Neuroimage2013; 76: 332–344.
74.
BlinkouskayaYCaçoiloAGollamudiT, et al.Brain aging mechanisms with mechanical manifestations. Mech Ageing Dev2021; 200: 111575.
75.
LaaksoMPLehtovirtaMPartanenK, et al.Hippocampus in Alzheimer’s disease: a 3-year follow-up MRI study. Biol Psychiatry2000; 47: 557–561.
76.
BattaIAbrolACalhounV. A multimodal deep learning approach for automated detection and characterization of distinctly salient features of Alzheimers disease. In: 2023 IEEE 20th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI), 2023, pp.1–4: IEEE.
77.
BraeckmanKDescampsBVanhoveC, et al.Exploratory relationships between cognitive improvements and training induced plasticity in hippocampus and cingulum in a rat model of mild traumatic brain injury: a diffusion MRI study. Brain Imaging Behav2020; 14: 2281–2294.
78.
GillSWangMMouchesP, et al.Neural correlates of the impulse dyscontrol domain of mild behavioral impairment. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2021; 36: 1398–1406.
79.
XiaoDWangKTheriaultL, et al.White matter integrity and key structures affected in Alzheimer's disease characterized by diffusion tensor imaging. Eur J Neurosci2022; 56: 5319–5331.
80.
BiesbroekJMVerhagenMGvan der StigchelS, et al.When the central integrator disintegrates: a review of the role of the thalamus in cognition and dementia. Alzheimers Dement2024; 20: 2209–2222.
81.
JulayanontPDeToledoJC. Validity of the clinical dementia rating scale sum of boxes in staging and detection of cognitive impairment in Mexican Americans. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol2022; 35: 128–134.
82.
NogueiraJFreitasSDuroD, et al.Validation study of the Alzheimer’s disease assessment scale–cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) for the Portuguese patients with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Clin Neuropsychol2018; 32: 46–59.
83.
Peña-CasanovaJ. Alzheimer's disease assessment scale–cognitive in clinical practice. Int Psychogeriatr1997; 9: 105–114.
MuñozSSGarnerBOoiL. Understanding the role of ApoE fragments in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurochem Res2019; 44: 1297–1305.
86.
GoldbergTHueyEDevanandD. Association of APOE e2 genotype with Alzheimer’s and non-Alzheimer’s neurodegenerative pathologies. Nat Commun2020; 11: 4727.
87.
ZalocuskyKANajmRTaubesAL, et al.Neuronal ApoE upregulates MHC-I expression to drive selective neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s disease. Nat Neurosci2021; 24: 786–798.
88.
BouwmanFHFrisoniGBJohnsonSC, et al.Clinical application of CSF biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: from rationale to ratios. Alzheimers Dement (Amst)2022; 14: e12314.
89.
MerloSSpampinatoSFSortinoMA. Early compensatory responses against neuronal injury: a new therapeutic window of opportunity for Alzheimer's disease?CNS Neurosci Ther2019; 25: 5–13.
90.
De StrooperBKarranE. The cellular phase of Alzheimer’s disease. Cell2016; 164: 603–615.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
