In 2018, the US National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association proposed a purely biological definition of Alzheimer's disease that relies on biomarkers. Although the intended use of this framework was for research purposes, it has engendered debate and challenges regarding its use in everyday clinical practice. For instance, cognitively unimpaired individuals can have biomarker evidence of both amyloid β and tau pathology but will often not develop clinical manifestations in their lifetime. Furthermore, a positive Alzheimer's disease pattern of biomarkers can be observed in other brain diseases in which Alzheimer's disease pathology is present as a comorbidity. In this Personal View, the International Working Group presents what we consider to be the current limitations of biomarkers in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and, on the basis of this evidence, we propose recommendations for how biomarkers should and should not be used for diagnosing Alzheimer's disease in a clinical setting. We recommend that Alzheimer's disease diagnosis be restricted to people who have positive biomarkers together with specific Alzheimer's disease phenotypes, whereas biomarker-positive cognitively unimpaired individuals should be considered only at-risk for progression to Alzheimer's disease.

Background: Predicting the progression of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is important for treatment selection and patient counseling. Structural MRI markers such as hippocampus or basal forebrain volumes might represent useful instruments for the prediction of cognitive decline. The primary objective was to determine the predictive value of hippocampus and basal forebrain volumes for global and domain specific cognitive decline in AD dementia during cholinergic treatment. Methods: We used MRI and cognitive data from 124 patients with the clinical diagnosis of AD dementia, derived from the ADNI-1 cohort, who were on standard of care cholinesterase inhibitor treatment during a follow-up period between 0.4 and 3.1 years. We used linear mixed effects models with cognitive function as outcome to assess the main effects as well as two-way interactions between baseline volumes and time controlling for age, sex, and total intracranial volume. This model accounts for individual variation in follow-up times. Results: Basal forebrain volume, but not hippocampus volume, was a significant predictor of rates of global cognitive decline. Larger volumes were associated with smaller rates of cognitive decline. Left hippocampus volume had a modest association with rates of episodic memory decline. Baseline performance in global cognition and memory was significantly associated with hippocampus and basal forebrain volumes; in addition, basal forebrain volume was associated with baseline performance in executive function. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that in AD dementia patients, basal forebrain volume may be a useful marker to predict subsequent cognitive decline during cholinergic treatment.