Tracking neuroinflammatory biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease: a strategy for individualized therapeutic approaches?

Background: Recent trials of anti-amyloid-β (Aβ) monoclonal antibodies, including lecanemab and donanemab, in early Alzheimer disease (AD) showed that these drugs have limited clinical benefits and their use comes with a significant risk of serious adverse events. Thus, it seems crucial to explore complementary therapeutic approaches. Genome-wide association studies identified robust associations between AD and several AD risk genes related to immune response, including but not restricted to CD33 and TREM2. Here, we critically reviewed the current knowledge on candidate neuroinflammatory biomarkers and their role in characterizing the pathophysiology of AD. Main body: Neuroinflammation is recognized to be a crucial and contributing component of AD pathogenesis. The fact that neuroinflammation is most likely present from earliest pre-stages of AD and co-occurs with the deposition of Aβ reinforces the need to precisely define the sequence and nature of neuroinflammatory events. Numerous clinical trials involving anti-inflammatory drugs previously yielded unfavorable outcomes in early and mild-to-moderate AD. Although the reasons behind these failures remain unclear, these may include the time and the target selected for intervention. Indeed, in our review, we observed a stage-dependent neuroinflammatory process in the AD brain. While the initial activation of glial cells counteracts early brain Aβ deposition, the downregulation in the functional state of microglia occurs at more advanced disease stages. To address this issue, personalized neuroinflammatory modulation therapy is required. The emergence of reliable blood-based neuroinflammatory biomarkers, particularly glial fibrillary acidic protein, a marker of reactive astrocytes, may facilitate the classification of AD patients based on the ATI(N) biomarker framework. This expands upon the traditional classification of Aβ (“A”), tau (“T”), and neurodegeneration (“N”), by incorporating a novel inflammatory component (“I”). Conclusions: The present review outlines the current knowledge on potential neuroinflammatory biomarkers and, importantly, emphasizes the role of longitudinal analyses, which are needed to accurately monitor the dynamics of cerebral inflammation. Such a precise information on time and place will be required before anti-inflammatory therapeutic interventions can be considered for clinical evaluation. We propose that an effective anti-neuroinflammatory therapy should specifically target microglia and astrocytes, while considering the individual ATI(N) status of patients.