Comparing measures of decline to dementia in amnestic MCI subjects in the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) Uniform Data Set

National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98105, USA.
International Psychogeriatrics (Impact Factor: 1.93). 04/2012; 24(10):1553-60. DOI: 10.1017/S1041610212000452
Source: PubMed


Many studies have investigated factors associated with the rate of decline and evolution from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia in elderly patients. In this analysis, we compared the rates of decline to dementia estimated from three common global measures of cognition: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes (CDR-SB) score, and a neuropsychological tests composite score (CS).
A total of 2,899 subjects in the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set aged 65+ years diagnosed with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) were included in this analysis. Population-averaged decline to dementia rates was estimated and compared for standardized MMSE, CDR-SB, and CS using Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE). Associations between rate of decline and several potential correlates of decline were also calculated and compared across measures.
The CDR-SB had the steepest estimated slope, with a decline of 0.49 standard deviations (SD) per year, followed by the MMSE with 0.22 SD per year, and finally the CS with 0.07 SD per year. The rate of decline of the three measures differed significantly in a global test for differences (p < 0.0001). Age at visit, body mass index (BMI) at visit, Apolipoprotein E (APOE) ɛ4 allele status, and race (black vs. white) had significantly different relationships with rate of decline in a global test for difference among the three measures.
These results suggest that both the rate of decline and the effects of AD risk factors on decline to dementia can vary depending on the evaluative measure used.

Download full-text


Available from: Walter A Kukull,
  • Source
    • "It seems unlikely that cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, such as amyloid and tau concentrations, will reflect cognitive and behavioral deterioration better than neuropsychological assessment [23] [51] [52]. However, if one would combine neuropsychological measures as endpoints with sample enrichment strategies by neuroimaging, genetic, and neurochemical biomarkers, the statistical power of intervention studies might be increased even further [5] [13] [18]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Scales of global cognition and behavior, often used as endpoints for intervention trials in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), are insufficiently responsive (i.e., relatively insensitive to change). Large patient samples are needed to detect beneficial drug effects. Therefore, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures of cerebral atrophy have been proposed as surrogate endpoints. To examine how neuropsychological assessment compares to MRI in this respect. We measured hippocampal atrophy, cortical thickness, and performance on neuropsychological tests in memory clinic patients at baseline and after two years. Neurologists rated the patients as cognitively normal (n = 28; Clinical Dementia Rating, CDR = 0) or as impaired (n = 34; CDR > 0). We administered five tests of memory, executive functioning, and verbal fluency. A composite neuropsychological score was calculated by taking the mean of the demographically corrected standard scores. MRI was done on a 3 Tesla scanner. Volumetric measurements of the hippocampus and surrounding cortex were made automatically using FreeSurfer software. The composite neuropsychological score deteriorated 0.6 SD in the impaired group, and was virtually unchanged in the normal group. Annual hippocampal atrophy rates were 3.4% and 0.6% in the impaired and normal cognition groups, respectively. Estimates of required sample sizes to detect a 50% reduction in rate of change were larger using rate of hippocampal atrophy (n = 131) or cortical thickness (n = 488) as outcome compared to change scores on neuropsychological assessment (n = 62). Neuropsychological assessment is more responsive than MRI measures of brain atrophy for detecting disease progression in memory clinic patients with MCI or AD.
    Journal of Alzheimer's disease: JAD 01/2014; 40(2). DOI:10.3233/JAD-131484 · 4.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is an urgent need to identify new treatments for the rapidly growing population of people with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Innovations in clinical trial designs many help to reduce development time, provide more definitive answers regarding drug efficacy, and facilitate prioritizing compounds to be advanced to Phase III clinical trials. Standard designs compare drug and placebo changes from baseline on a rating scale. Baysian adaptive clinical trials allow the use of data collected in the trial to modify doses, sample size, trial duration, and entry criteria in an ongoing way as the data are collected. Disease-modification is supported by findings on staggered start and delayed withdrawal designs. Futility designs can use historical controls and may shorten trial duration. Combination therapy designs may allow investigation of additive or synergistic treatment effects. Novel trial selection criteria allow investigation of treatment effects in asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic, prodromal AD populations. The Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SOB) can be considered as a single trial outcome in early disease populations. Alternate forms of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Portion (ADAS-cog), computerized measures, and pharmacoeconomic scales provide new and relevant information on drug effects. Comparative dose strategies are used in trials of symptomatic agents, and novel methods including withdrawal designs, symptom emergence analyses, and sequential designs are being utilized to assess the efficacy of putative psychotropic agents. The choice of trial design is driven by the question to be answered by the clinical trial; an increasing number of design approaches are available and may be useful in accelerating and refining AD drug development.
    American Journal of Neurodegenerative Diseases 01/2012; 1(3):205-16.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is growing evidence that antihypertensive agents, particularly centrally acting ACE inhibitors (CACE-Is), which cross the blood-brain barrier, are associated with a reduced rate of cognitive decline. Given this, we compared the rates of cognitive decline in clinic patients with dementia receiving CACE-Is (CACE-I) with those not currently treated with CACE-Is (NoCACE-I), and with those who started CACE-Is, during their first 6 months of treatment (NewCACE-I). Observational case-control study. 2 university hospital memory clinics. 817 patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease, vascular or mixed dementia. Of these, 361 with valid cognitive scores were included for analysis, 85 CACE-I and 276 NoCACE-I. Patients were included if the baseline and end-point (standardised at 6 months apart) Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE) or Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment (Qmci) scores were available. Patients with comorbid depression or other dementia subtypes were excluded. The average 6-month rates of change in scores were compared between CACE-I, NoCACE-I and NewCACE-I patients. When the rate of decline was compared between groups, there was a significant difference in the median, 6-month rate of decline in Qmci scores between CACE-I (1.8 points) and NoCACE-I (2.1 points) patients (p=0.049), with similar, non-significant changes in SMMSE. Median SMMSE scores improved by 1.2 points in the first 6 months of CACE treatment (NewCACE-I), compared to a 0.8 point decline for the CACE-I (p=0.003) group and a 1 point decline for the NoCACE-I (p=0.001) group over the same period. Multivariate analysis, controlling for baseline characteristics, showed significant differences in the rates of decline, in SMMSE, between the three groups, p=0.002. Cognitive scores may improve in the first 6 months after CACE-I treatment and use of CACE-Is is associated with a reduced rate of cognitive decline in patients with dementia.
    BMJ Open 07/2013; 3(7). DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002881 · 2.27 Impact Factor