Skip to main content
. 2024 Feb 8;20(4):2485–2496. doi: 10.1002/alz.13653

TABLE 1.

Characteristics of the cohort by clinical group.

CU

n = 100

iRBD

n = 15

MCI‐LB

n = 37

DLB

n = 70

p‐Value *
Age, years 68.76 (10.01) 67.29 (7.85) 68.69 (8.72) 69.50 (8.47) 0.848
Males, n (%) [Link] , [Link] 86 (86%) 10 (67%) 36 (97%) 59 (84%) 0.033
APOE ε4, n (%) 27 (29%) 5 (36%) 11 (30%) 29 (42%) 0.324
Education, years 15.57 (2.34) 16.73 (3.13) 16.03 (2.69) 15.66 (3.05) 0.406
MMSE 29.02 (0.90) 28.13 (1.13) 27.27 (2.16) 21.81 (5.72) <0.001
CDR‐SOB [Link] , [Link] 0.06 (0.32) 0.23 (0.62) 1.66 (0.96) 5.56 (3.27) <0.001
Chronic kidney disease, n (%) 10 (10%) 1 (67%) 2 (5%) 2 (3%) 0.325
Abnormal DaTSCAN, n (%) § NA 4 (40%) 21 (72%) 29 (91%) 0.004
Amyloid positive, n (%) 30 (30%) 4 (27%) 10 (27%) 40 (57%) <0.001
PiB AD signature SUVr 1.53 (0.39) 1.46 (0.25) 1.53 (0.37) 1.78 (0.48) <0.001
Tau positive, n (%) 27 (27%) 3 (21%) 8 (31%) 16 (40%) 0.419
Tau AD signature SUVr 1.20 (0.09) 1.19 (0.08) 1.20 (0.10) 1.27 (0.21) 0.061
Visual hallucinations, n (%) NA 0 (0%) 5 (14%) 39 (56%) <0.001
Cognitive fluctuations, n (%) NA 0 (0%) 16 (43%) 52 (74%) <0.001
Parkinsonism, n (%) NA 3 (20%) 31 (84%) 62 (89%) <0.001
RBD, n (%) NA 15 (100%) 34 (92%) 66 (94%) 0.523
Aβ 42/40 0.06 (0.02) 0.06 (0.01) 0.06 (0.02) 0.06 (0.01) 0.387
GFAP [Link] , [Link] 90.86 (47.88) 98.36 (42.99) 128.15 (76.33) 154.28 (86.12) <0.001
NfL 22.46 (14.40) 20.79 (5.33) 22.15 (11.10) 31.98 (21.40) <0.001
p‐tau 181 1.88 (0.95) 1.87 (0.86) 2.19 (1.22) 2.75 (1.42) <0.001

Abbreviations: Aβ, amyloid beta; AD, Alzheimer's disease; APOE ε4, apolipoprotein E ε4 allele; CDR‐SOB, Clinical Dementia Rating‐Sum of Boxes; CU, cognitively unimpaired; DaTSCAN, dopamine active transporter scan; DLB, dementia with Lewy bodies; GFAP, glial fibrillary acidic protein; iRBD, isolated rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder; MCI‐LB, mild cognitive impairment with Lewy bodies; MMSE, Mini‐Mental State Examination; NfL, neurofilament light; PiB, Pittsburgh compound B; p‐tau, phosphorylated tau; RBD, REM sleep behavior disorder; SUVr, standardized uptake value ratio.

* p‐values for differences between groups come from either ANOVA for continuous variables or a chi‐square test for categorical variables.

Significant differences between DLB and CU (p < 0.05).

Significant differences between MCI‐LB and CU (p < 0.05).

§DaT scan was available for a total of 10 iRBDs, 29 MCI‐LBs, and 32 DLBs.