Digital biomarkers and sex impacts in Alzheimer's disease management - potential utility for innovative 3P medicine approach

Robbert L Harms, Alberto Ferrari, Irene B Meier, Julie Martinkova, Enrico Santus, Nicola Marino, Davide Cirillo, Simona Mellino, Silvina Catuara Solarz, Ioannis Tarnanas, Cassandra Szoeke, Jakub Hort, Alfonso Valencia, Maria Teresa Ferretti, Azizi Seixas, Antonella Santuccione Chadha, Robbert L Harms, Alberto Ferrari, Irene B Meier, Julie Martinkova, Enrico Santus, Nicola Marino, Davide Cirillo, Simona Mellino, Silvina Catuara Solarz, Ioannis Tarnanas, Cassandra Szoeke, Jakub Hort, Alfonso Valencia, Maria Teresa Ferretti, Azizi Seixas, Antonella Santuccione Chadha

Abstract

Digital biomarkers are defined as objective, quantifiable physiological and behavioral data that are collected and measured by means of digital devices. Their use has revolutionized clinical research by enabling high-frequency, longitudinal, and sensitive measurements. In the field of neurodegenerative diseases, an example of a digital biomarker-based technology is instrumental activities of daily living (iADL) digital medical application, a predictive biomarker of conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) to dementia due to AD in individuals aged 55 + . Digital biomarkers show promise to transform clinical practice. Nevertheless, their use may be affected by variables such as demographics, genetics, and phenotype. Among these factors, sex is particularly important in Alzheimer's, where men and women present with different symptoms and progression patterns that impact diagnosis. In this study, we explore sex differences in Altoida's digital medical application in a sample of 568 subjects consisting of a clinical dataset (MCI and dementia due to AD) and a healthy population. We found that a biological sex-classifier, built on digital biomarker features captured using Altoida's application, achieved a 75% ROC-AUC (receiver operating characteristic - area under curve) performance in predicting biological sex in healthy individuals, indicating significant differences in neurocognitive performance signatures between males and females. The performance dropped when we applied this classifier to more advanced stages on the AD continuum, including MCI and dementia, suggesting that sex differences might be disease-stage dependent. Our results indicate that neurocognitive performance signatures built on data from digital biomarker features are different between men and women. These results stress the need to integrate traditional approaches to dementia research with digital biomarker technologies and personalized medicine perspectives to achieve more precise predictive diagnostics, targeted prevention, and customized treatment of cognitive decline.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13167-022-00284-3.

Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease; Classifier; Digital biomarkers; Predictive preventive personalized medicine (PPPM); Sex.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interestES is Director of AI and Machine Learning at Bayer. A.S.C. is an official employee of Biogen International and works as Head of Stakeholder Engagement for Alzheimer disease at Biogen. She is also co-founder and CEO of the Women’s Brain Project.

© The Author(s) 2022.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The motoric functioning tasks in the Altoida test. These are executed one after another. Using their index finger of their dominant hand, from left to right, the task is to (1) draw a circle, (2) draw a square, (3) draw a rotated W shape within 7 s, (4) draw as many circles as possible within 7 s, (5) tap the highlighted buttons (left, right, left, right, etc.), and (6) tap the highlighted button as fast as possible, the buttons highlight at random
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Illustration of the augmented reality (AR) task in the Altoida test. During the AR test, the subject is asked to place and find three virtual objects in the room. To do so, the subject is required to walk around the room holding a tablet or smartphone device in front of him/her. While doing so, the camera of the device records the environment and displays it back to the user on the screen, augmented with virtual objects (in this illustration, a teddy bear). The user needs to place the objects on flat surfaces and later recall their position by walking back to that location
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with five-fold cross-validation results for the digital biomarker sex classifier
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) area under curve (AUC) for different subgroups. A Comparison over different stages of Alzheimer’s progression. B Comparison over different age groups in the healthy population. Error bars show standard error of the mean (SEM). P-values are computed using the Mann Whitney U test
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Feature importance of the sex classifier in healthy individuals. A The top five feature groups according to the SHAP method. Each bar represents the summed SHAP value of the features in that feature group. B A feature value SHAP distribution plot for the top five contributing features. Subject specific SHAP values were computed for each datapoint in the classifier training data. For each feature, we then plot for each datapoint a dot with the feature value of that datapoint, with the dot color coded by the relative feature value. The position of each dot on the SHAP value x-axis represents the magnitude and the direction of the contribution of that specific feature value of that specific datapoint towards classifying as female (− 1) or male (+ 1). Acronyms in the plots are augmented reality (AR), fast Fourier transform (FFT), SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), accelerometer (ACC), variance (var), first part of a single test (1st), or second part of a single test (2nd)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Comparative histograms of the top five contributing features (according to the SHAP results in Fig. 5) for the group of healthy subjects, with male data in blue and female data in red. Acronyms are augmented reality (AR), fast Fourier transform (FFT), accelerometer (ACC), variance (var), first part of a single test (1st), or second part of a single test (2nd)
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Comparative histograms of the top five contributing features (according to the SHAP results in Fig. 5) for the combined group of MCI and AD subjects, with male data in blue and female data in red. Acronyms are augmented reality (AR), fast Fourier transform (FFT), accelerometer (ACC), variance (var), first part of a single test (1st), or second part of a single test (2nd)

References

    1. Strimbu K, Tavel JA: What are biomarkers?. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2010;5:463–6. 10.1097/coh.0b013e32833ed177.
    1. Davis KD, Aghaeepour N, Ahn AH, Angst MS, Borsook D, Brenton A, Burczynski ME, Crean C, Edwards R, Gaudilliere B, Hergenroeder GW, Iadarola MJ, Iyengar S, Jiang Y, Kong J-T, Mackey S, Saab CY, Sang CN, Scholz J, Segerdahl M, Tracey I, Veasley C, Wang J, Wager TD, Wasan AD, Pelleymounter MA. Discovery and validation of biomarkers to aid the development of safe and effective pain therapeutics: challenges and opportunities. Nat Rev Neurol. 2020;16:381–400. doi: 10.1038/s41582-020-0362-2.
    1. Hu X-S, Nascimento TD, Bender MC, Hall T, Petty S, O'Malley S, Ellwood RP, Kaciroti N, Maslowski E, DaSilva AF. Feasibility of a real-time clinical augmented reality and artificial intelligence framework for pain detection and localization from the brain. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21:e13594. doi: 10.2196/13594.
    1. Coravos A, Khozin S, Mandl KD: Developing and adopting safe and effective digital biomarkers to improve patient outcomes. Npj Digit Med. 2019;2. 10.1038/s41746-019-0090-4.
    1. Fagherazzi G, Fischer A, Ismael M, Despotovic V. Voice for health: the use of vocal biomarkers from research to clinical practice. Digit Biomark. 2021;5:78–88. doi: 10.1159/000515346.
    1. Smarr BL, Aschbacher K, Fisher SM, Chowdhary A, Dilchert S, Puldon K, Rao A, Hecht FM, Mason AE: Feasibility of continuous fever monitoring using wearable devices. Sci Rep. 2020;10. 10.1038/s41598-020-78355-6.
    1. Rykov Y, Thach T-Q, Dunleavy G, Roberts AC, Christopoulos G, Soh CK, Car J: Activity tracker–based metrics as digital markers of cardiometabolic health: cross-sectional study. {JMIR} {mHealth} and {uHealth}. 2020;8:e16409. 10.2196/16409.
    1. Psaltos D, Chappie K, Karahanoglu FI, Chasse R, Demanuele C, Kelekar A, Zhang H, Marquez V, Kangarloo T, Patel S, Czech M, Caouette D, Cai X. Multimodal wearable sensors to measure gait and voice. Digit Biomark. 2019;3:133–144. doi: 10.1159/000503282.
    1. Li X, Dunn J, Salins D, Zhou G, Zhou W, Rose SMS-F, Perelman D, Colbert E, Runge R, Rego S, Sonecha R, Datta S, Mclaughlin T, Snyder MP: Digital health: tracking physiomes and activity using wearable biosensors reveals useful health-related information. Plos Biol 2017;15:e2001402. 10.1371/journal.pbio.2001402.
    1. Owens AP: The role of heart rate variability in the future of remote digital biomarkers. Front Neurosci. 2020;14. 10.3389/fnins.2020.582145.
    1. Miller MK and Mandryk RL: Differentiating in-game frustration from at-game frustration using touch pressure. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Conference on Interactive Surfaces and Spaces (ISS '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 225–34. 2016. 10.1145/2992154.2992185.
    1. Riva G, Wiederhold B, Di Lernia D, Chirico A, Mantovani F, Cipresso P, Gaggioli A, Riva E: Virtual reality meets artificial intelligence: the emergence of advanced digital therapeutics and digital biomarkers. Ann Rev Cyber Ther Telemed. 2019;18:3–7.
    1. Rai L, Boyle R, Brosnan L, Rice H, Farina F, Tarnanas I, Whelan R: Digital biomarkers based individualized prognosis for people at risk of dementia: the AltoidaML multi-site external validation study. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2020;1194:157–71. 10.1007/978-3-030-32622-7_14.
    1. Inan OT, Tenaerts P, Prindiville SA, Reynolds HR, Dizon DS, Cooper-Arnold K, Turakhia M, Pletcher MJ, Preston KL, Krumholz HM, Marlin BM, Mandl KD, Klasnja P, Spring B, Iturriaga E, Campo R, Desvigne-Nickens P, Rosenberg Y, Steinhubl SR, Califf RM: Digitizing clinical trials. Npj Digit Med. 2020;3. 10.1038/s41746-020-0302-y.
    1. Bayat S, Babulal GM, Schindler SE, Fagan AM, Morris JC, Mihailidis A, Roe CM. GPS driving: a digital biomarker for preclinical Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer's Res Ther. 2021;13:1–9. doi: 10.1186/s13195-021-00852-1.
    1. Dorsey ER, Papapetropoulos S, Xiong M, Kieburtz K. The first frontier: digital biomarkers for neurodegenerative disorders. Digit Biomark. 2017 doi: 10.1159/000477383.
    1. Sperling RA, Aisen PS, Beckett LA, Bennett DA, Craft S, Fagan AM, Iwatsubo T, Jack CR, Kaye J, Montine TJ, Park DC, Reiman EM, Rowe CC, Siemers E, Stern Y, Yaffe K, Carrillo MC, Thies B, Morrison-Bogorad M, Wagster MV, Phelps CH. Toward defining the preclinical stages of Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7:280–292. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.003.
    1. Serrano-Pozo A, Frosch MP, Masliah E, Hyman BT. Neuropathological alterations in Alzheimer disease. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2011;1:a006189–a006189. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a006189.
    1. Grill JD, Nuño MM, Gillen DL. Which MCI patients should be included in prodromal Alzheimer disease clinical trials? Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2019;33:104–112. doi: 10.1097/wad.0000000000000303.
    1. Baldinger-Melich P, Urquijo Castro MF, Seiger R, Ruef A, Dwyer DB, Kranz GS, Klöbl M, Kambeitz J, Kaufmann U. Windischberger C and others: Sex matters: a multivariate pattern analysis of sex-and gender-related neuroanatomical differences in cis-and transgender individuals using structural magnetic resonance imaging. Cereb Cortex. 2020;30:1345–1356. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhz170.
    1. Sperling R, Mormino E, Johnson K. The evolution of preclinical Alzheimer’s disease: implications for prevention trials. Neuron. 2014;84:608–622. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.10.038.
    1. Cirillo D, Catuara-Solarz S, Morey C, Guney E, Subirats L, Mellino S, Gigante A, Valencia A, Rementeria MJ, Chadha AS, Mavridis N: Sex and gender differences and biases in artificial intelligence for biomedicine and healthcare. Npj Digit Med. 2020;3. 10.1038/s41746-020-0288-5.
    1. Ferretti MT, Iulita MF, Cavedo E, Chiesa PA, Dimech AS, Chadha AS, Baracchi F, Girouard H, Misoch S, Giacobini E, Depypere H, Hampel H. Sex differences in Alzheimer disease — the gateway to precision medicine. Nat Rev Neurol. 2018;14:457–469. doi: 10.1038/s41582-018-0032-9.
    1. Fan CC, Banks SJ, Thompson WK, Chen C-H, McEvoy LK, Tan CH, Kukull W, Bennett DA, Farrer LA, Mayeux R, Schellenberg GD, Andreassen OA, Desikan R, Dale AM. Sex-dependent autosomal effects on clinical progression of Alzheimer’s disease. Brain. 2020;143:2272–2280. doi: 10.1093/brain/awaa164.
    1. van Maurik IS, Vos SJ, Bos I, Bouwman FH, Teunissen CE, Scheltens P, Barkhof F, Frolich L, Kornhuber J, Wiltfang J, Maier W, Peters O, Rüther E, Nobili F, Frisoni GB, Spiru L, Freund-Levi Y, Wallin AK, Hampel H, Soininen H, Tsolaki M, Verhey F, Kłoszewska I, Mecocci P, Vellas B, Lovestone S, Galluzzi S, Herukka S-K, Santana I, Baldeiras I, de Mendonça A, Silva D, Chetelat G, Egret S, Palmqvist S, Hansson O, Visser PJ, Berkhof J, van der Flier WM. Biomarker-based prognosis for people with mild cognitive impairment (ABIDE): a modelling study. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18:1034–1044. doi: 10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30283-2.
    1. Ferretti M, Martinkova J, Biskup E, Benke T, Gialdini G, Nedelska Z, Rauen K, Mantua V, Religa D. Hort J and others: Sex and gender differences in Alzheimer’s disease: current challenges and implications for clinical practice: position paper of the Dementia and Cognitive Disorders Panel of the European Academy of Neurology. Eur J Neurol. 2020;27:928–943. doi: 10.1111/ene.14174.
    1. Sundermann EE, Barnes LL, Bondi MW, Bennett DA, Salmon DP, Maki PM. Improving detection of amnestic mild cognitive impairment with sex-specific cognitive norms. J Alzheimers Dis. 2021;84:1763–1770. doi: 10.3233/JAD-215260.
    1. Van Der Hoek MD, Nieuwenhuizen A, Keijer J, Ashford JW. The MemTrax test compared to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment estimation of mild cognitive impairment. J Alzheimers Dis. 2019;67:1045–1054. doi: 10.3233/JAD-181003.
    1. Gualtieri CT, Johnson LG. Neurocognitive testing supports a broader concept of mild cognitive impairment. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Dement. 2005;20:359–366. doi: 10.1177/153331750502000607.
    1. Junkkila J, Oja S, Laine M, Karrasch M. Applicability of the CANTAB-PAL computerized memory test in identifying amnestic mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2012;34:83–89. doi: 10.1159/000342116.
    1. Wouters H, Zwinderman AH, van Gool WA, Schmand B, Lindeboom R. Adaptive cognitive testing in dementia. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2009;18:118–127. doi: 10.1002/mpr.283.
    1. Chan JY, Yau ST, Kwok TC, Tsoi KK. Diagnostic performance of digital cognitive tests for the identification of MCI and dementia: a systematic review. Ageing Res Rev. 2021;72:101506. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2021.101506.
    1. Buegler M, Harms RL, Balasa M, Meier IB, Exarchos T, Rai L, Boyle R, Tort A, Kozori M, Lazarou E, Rampini M, Cavaliere C, Vlamos P, Tsolaki M, Babiloni C, Soricelli A, Frisoni G, Sanchez-Valle R, Whelan R, Merlo-Pich E, Tarnanas I: Digital biomarker-based individualized prognosis for people at risk of dementia. Alzheimers Dement. 2020;12. 10.1002/dad2.12073.
    1. Livingston G, Huntley J, Sommerlad A, Ames D, Ballard C, Banerjee S, Brayne C, Burns A, Cohen-Mansfield J. Cooper C and others: Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission. Lancet. 2020;396:413–446. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30367-6.
    1. Jack CR, Jr, Albert MS, Knopman DS, McKhann GM, Sperling RA, Carrillo MC, Thies B, Phelps CH. Introduction to the recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7:257–262. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.004.
    1. Klinge I: Innovative changes in biomedicine: integration of sex and gender aspects in research and clinical practice. 2010:231–42. 10.1007/978-3-531-92501-1_17.
    1. Chen T, Guestrin C: XGBoost. 2016. 10.1145/2939672.2939785.
    1. Lundberg SM, Lee S-I: A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 2017:4765–74.
    1. Lundberg SM, Erion G, Chen H, DeGrave A, Prutkin JM, Nair B, Katz R, Himmelfarb J, Bansal N, Lee S-I. From local explanations to global understanding with explainable AI for trees. Nat Mach Intell. 2020;2:56–67. doi: 10.1038/s42256-019-0138-9.
    1. Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med. 1978;8:283–298. doi: 10.1016/s0001-2998(78)80014-2.
    1. Mann HB, Whitney DR. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Ann Math Stat. 1947;18:50–60. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177730491.
    1. Hampel H, Vergallo A, Giorgi FS, Kim SH, Depypere H, Graziani M, Saidi A, Nisticò R, Lista S. Initiative APM and others: Precision medicine and drug development in Alzheimer’s disease: the importance of sexual dimorphism and patient stratification. Front Neuroendocrinol. 2018;50:31–51. doi: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2018.06.001.
    1. Martinkova J, Quevenco F-C, Karcher H, Ferrari A, Sandset EC, Szoeke C, Hort J, Schmidt R, Chadha AS, Ferretti MT. Proportion of women and reporting of outcomes by sex in clinical trials for Alzheimer disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4:e2124124–e2124124. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.24124.
    1. Sundermann EE, Biegon A, Rubin LH, Lipton RB, Mowrey W, Landau S, Maki PM. Better verbal memory in women than men in MCI despite similar levels of hippocampal atrophy. Neurology. 2016;86:1368–1376. doi: 10.1212/wnl.0000000000002570.
    1. Lin KA, Choudhury KR, Rathakrishnan BG, Marks DM, Petrella JR, Doraiswamy PM. Marked gender differences in progression of mild cognitive impairment over 8 years. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;1:103–110. doi: 10.1016/j.trci.2015.07.001.
    1. Endo H, Kawahara K. Gender differences in hand stability of normal young people assessed at low force levels. Ergonomics. 2011;54:273–281. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2010.547607.
    1. Singh S, Shila DM and Kaiser G: Side channel attack on smartphone sensors to infer gender of the user. In: Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems. 2019;436–7. 10.1145/3356250.3361939.
    1. Jakobi JM, Haynes EM, Smart RR. Is there sufficient evidence to explain the cause of sexually dimorphic behaviour in force steadiness? Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2018;43:1207–1214. doi: 10.1139/apnm-2018-0196.
    1. van Putten MJAM, Olbrich S, Arns M: Predicting sex from brain rhythms with deep learning. Sci Rep. 2018;8. 10.1038/s41598-018-21495-7.
    1. Rosenblatt JD. Multivariate revisit to “sex beyond the genitalia”. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113:E1966–E1967. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1523961113.
    1. Weis S, Patil KR, Hoffstaedter F, Nostro A, Yeo BTT, Eickhoff SB. Sex classification by resting state brain connectivity. Cereb Cortex. 2019;30:824–835. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhz129.
    1. Troje NF. Decomposing biological motion: a framework for analysis and synthesis of human gait patterns. J Vis. 2002;2:2. doi: 10.1167/2.5.2.
    1. D’Agostino RB, Sr, Vasan RS, Pencina MJ, Wolf PA, Cobain M, Massaro JM, Kannel WB. General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2008;117:743–753. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.699579.
    1. Sundermann EE, Biegon A, Rubin LH, Lipton RB, Mowrey W, Landau S, Maki PM. Initiative ADN and others: better verbal memory in women than men in MCI despite similar levels of hippocampal atrophy. Neurology. 2016;86:1368–1376. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002570.
    1. Hampel H, Vergallo A, Perry G, Lista S. Initiative APM and others: the Alzheimer precision medicine initiative. J Alzheimers Dis. 2019;68:1–24. doi: 10.3233/JAD-181121.
    1. Harrold J, Ramanathan M, Mager D: Network-based approaches in drug discovery and early development. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2013;94:651–8.
    1. Hampel H, O’Bryant S, Castrillo J, Ritchie C, Rojkova K, Broich K, Benda N, Nisticò R, Frank R. Dubois B and others: Precision medicine-the golden gate for detection, treatment and prevention of Alzheimer’s disease. J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2016;3:243.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner