Suggestions
Jérôme Braudeau
PhD in Neuroscience, Co-founder & CEO @ AgenT | Defeating Alzheimer's
Jérôme Braudeau, Co-founder & CEO of AgenT
Jérôme Braudeau is the Co-founder and CEO of AgenT, a biotechnology company dedicated to developing innovative therapies for age-related diseases, particularly Alzheimer's.36 He holds a PhD in Neuroscience and is focused on defeating Alzheimer's through his work at AgenT.46
Professional Experience
Education
Recent Activities
- Gave a 1-hour talk in Porto, Portugal on the Future of Healthcare, Health, themes of his focus, Career and Leadership2
- Participated in the BIOUS conference in San Diego5
- Presented at the AD/PD 2024 conference on Alzheimer's research and innovation4
Jérôme Braudeau is actively working to defeat Alzheimer's through his leadership at AgenT, a company he co-founded in 2018 with the ambition to contribute to the fight against this devastating disease.34
Highlights
The article "Blood Biomarkers to Detect Alzheimer Disease in Primary Care and Secondary Care" (Palmqvist et al., 2024) 📰🧬 examined the APS2 test, which uses Aβ42, Aβ40 and %pTau217 to identify AD patients in primary care and secondary care. However, the results interpretation remains open to debate.🤔💭
Here are the key points:
▶ Amyloid Pathology Prediction: The APS2 test (Aβ42/Aβ40 and %pTau217) can identify people with high levels of brain amyloid plaques (AD pathology) with 88-92% accuracy compared to CSF tests (Aβ42/Aβ40 and pTau217). 📊✅
▶ Physicians’ Amyloid Pathology Prediction: The APS2 test outperformed primary (89% vs 58%) and secondary care (92% vs 71%) physicians (clinical exams, cognitive tests, and CT scans) in predicting amyloid status. This result suggest a weaker link between amyloid load and AD symptoms (Ossenkoppele et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2022). 👩⚕️🧠👨⚕️
▶ ‘Clinical AD’ Prediction: The article suggest that the APS2 test predicted ‘clinical AD’ with 91% accuracy, but the definition of ‘clinical AD’ used is debatable. Authors defined ‘Clinical AD’ as having a typical clinical syndrome of AD at the MCI or dementia stage and a CSF Aβ42/40 or Aβ-PET positive result, which might bias the interpretation. 10 to 22% of AD dementia patients are CSF or PET Aβ-negative (Jansen et al., 2022), which wasn’t considered. For MCI patients, there are currently no clinical exams that can determine which ones will develop AD dementia symptoms or another degenerative disorder. The ‘Clinical AD’ for MCI patients is thus mainly based on amyloid biomarkers. This tends to significantly overestimate the APS2 performances in diagnosing patients with 'clinical AD' by confusing them with patients with 'AD pathology'. The study found that 21% of non-AD diagnosed patients were amyloid-positive, setting the APS2 test specificity for AD dementia symptoms at 79%. ⚖️🧩
In conclusion, the study shows that APS2 tests predict CSF/PET amyloid results very accurately. 🔬 However, there is a 20-40% discrepancy between amyloid status (CSF Aβ42, Aβ40 and pTau217 assays) and AD symptoms diagnosed by physicians (clinical exams), suggesting a limited connection between amyloid plaques and AD symptoms. 🧩 The definition of ‘clinical AD’ used here, based mainly on CSF/PET amyloid markers (circular reasoning), questions the APS2 performance in predicting AD symptoms. A less biased method to establish performances for ‘clinical AD’ might using retrospective longitudinal study.🌐 The patients would be diagnosed using established reference standards, such as the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria or DSM-IV in advanced stages of brain disorders, and blood biomarker performances would be analyzed on samples from the same patients at earlier stages, like MCI or mild dementia (Souchet et al., 2023). This approach would better define unbiased biomarker performance to identify ‘clinical AD’ as patients that develop AD dementia symptoms. 🔍📉
Refs in the comments.
A revised set of recommendations, "Revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer's disease: Alzheimer's Association Workgroup," (Jack et al., 2024) was published last week.📜🧠 These new recommendations suggest defining the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in clinical practice based solely on the presence or absence of cerebral amyloid plaques (A) and brain neurofibrillary tangles (T), independent of individual symptoms.❓🧩
Here are some critical points to consider: ⚠️
▶ Scientific Controversy: The announcement at the AAIC and CTAD Clinical Trials on Alzheimer's Disease in 2023 has stirred more than a little controversy.🗣️🔥These guidelines are not backed by a scientific and medical consensus.❌🔬Notably, the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) questioned the extent of the National Institute on Aging (NIA)’s involvement in the working group. The NIA has now removed its name from these revised criteria (see Alzforum’s article).🤔📉
▶ Challenging Findings: The principle of diagnosing AD based solely on amyloid and tau lesions relies on the idea that an individual with these lesions will eventually develop dementia symptoms, if the individual lives long enough🧠❗There's no scientific proof that support this. 📊 Studies even suggest that the association between hippocampus neuritic plaques and tangles, and dementia is stronger in younger old persons (75 years old, odds ratio, 10.19 and 8.61 respectively) than in older old ones (95 years old, odds ratio, 1.42 and 2.11 respectively) (Savva et al., 2009). This suggests that the older a cognitively normal subject is, the more amyloid plaques and tangles he has, but the less these lesions lead to dementia.👵📈 Similarly, in most non–AD dementias, amyloid positivity increased with both age and APOE ε4 carriership (Ossenkoppele et al., 2015) without causing AD symptoms. 🔄💡
▶ Complexity of Alzheimer’s: AD is a biologically complex disease.🧬🧠 While anti-amyloid antibodies reduce amyloid plaques by 60-85%, they slow down cognitive decline by only 27-35% (Mintun et al., 2021; van Dyck et al., 2023),📉💊 this indicates a limited association between clinical symptoms and brain lesions clearance. So, we cannot reduce AD solely to the presence of amyloid and tau lesions, even in patients with cognitive impairments.❌🧩 This reduction could hinder the development of new biomarkers aimed at identifying individuals who will develop AD dementia symptoms with high specificity (>90%) and treatments targeting other aspects of the disease beyond amyloid or tau.🌐🔬
In summary, these new recommendations do not represent a scientific consensus and should be considered critically (Alberto Espay's linkedIn posts).💭🔍The goal of medical research is to alleviate or slow down patient cognitive decline, and diagnostic criteria must at least identify those who will specifically decline to AD dementia symptoms (right patient at the right time) to ensure they receive appropriate treatment (right drug).💊🩺💡
