Article

Long-term observation of a multicomponent cognitive intervention in mild cognitive impairment.

Kbo-Inn-Salzach Klinikum, Psychiatric Hospital, Gabersee Haus 13, D-83512 Wasserburg/Inn, Germany .
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 5.81). 12/2012; 73(12):e1492-8. DOI: 10.4088/JCP.11m07270
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Recent studies demonstrated benefits of cognitive intervention in mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but few studies have determined long-term effects on cognition, conversion rate to Alzheimer's disease, and the role of early intervention.
A 6-month multicomponent cognitive group intervention was applied in participants with single- or multiple-domain amnestic MCI (defined according to Petersen's criteria). One group (n = 12) received the intervention at the beginning of the study period and was compared with an active control group (n = 12) who received it after an 8-month time lag. Follow-up assessments were conducted at 15 and 28 months (study period was August 2007-December 2009). The primary outcome was change in cognitive function as determined by changes in scores on the Mini-Mental State Examination and the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog), and the secondary outcomes were change in specific cognitive and noncognitive functions and conversion to Alzheimer's disease (according to DSM-IV/NINCDS-ADRDA criteria and NAI-AA criteria for probable Alzheimer's dementia with increased level of certainty).
Eighteen participants completed the study after 28 months. Long-term data revealed a stable intervention effect on the primary outcome ADAS-cog in the early-intervention group (P = .024). The participants in the later-intervention (control) group appeared to benefit to a lesser extent from the cognitive intervention compared to those who received it earlier. Only participants in the later-intervention group (6 of 12) converted to Alzheimer's disease during the 28-month study period.
Benefits of our 6-month cognitive intervention on global cognitive status appear to be preserved over extended follow-up periods. Early cognitive intervention may delay conversion to Alzheimer's disease. Findings in a small sample encourage the use of the intervention in larger-scale studies.
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00544856.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
92 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Alzheimer's disease (AD) represents an increasing worldwide healthcare epidemic. Secondary preventive disease-modifying treatments under clinical development are considered most effective when initiated as early as possible in the pathophysiological course and progression of the disease. Major targets are to enhance clearance and to reduce cerebral accumulation of amyloid, decrease hyperphosphorylation of tau and the generation of neurofibrillary tangles, reduce inflammation, and finally progressive neurodegeneration. Comprehensive sets of biological markers are needed to characterize the pathophysiological mechanisms, indicate effects of treatment and to facilitate early characterisation and detection of AD during the prodromal or even at asymptomatic stages. No primary or secondary preventive treatments for AD have been approved. Epidemiological research, however, has provided evidence of specifically modifiable risk and protective factors. Among them are vascular, lifestyle and psychological risk factors that may act both independently and by potentiating each other. These factors may be substantially impacted by single or multi-domain strategies to prevent or postpone the onset of AD-related pathophysiology. Researchers have recently started the European Dementia Prevention Initiative (EDPI), an international consortium to improve strategies for preventing dementia. EDPI, in particular, includes the Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER) which aims at optimizing the early identification of subjects at increased risk of late-life cognitive deterioration, and at the evaluation of multi-domain intervention strategies. The ongoing discussion on new diagnostic criteria provided by the International Working Group (IWG), as well as by the recommendations summoned by the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA) initiative, has inspired the creation of novel study designs and the definition of earlier target populations for trials in pre- and asymptomatic at-risk and prodromal stages of AD. As a result, a number of promising international prevention trials are currently ongoing. In this review, we critically discuss the main paths to AD prevention through control of modifiable risk factors and lifestyle changes. We will also review the role of biomarkers to identify subgroups of patients who would most likely benefit from secondary prevention strategies, and to evaluate the benefit of treatment in such patients.
    The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging 01/2015; 19(2):154-63. DOI:10.1007/s12603-014-0515-3 · 2.39 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a dynamic state between normal cognition and dementia, where interventions can be taken to stop or delay the progression to dementia. It is broadly of 2 types-amnestic, where memory loss is the chief concern and nonamnestic, where it is not. One variant of nonamnestic, dysexecutive, being more prevalent is sometimes known as a separate subtype by itself. Diagnosis of MCI is mostly clinical and is aided by various scales and neuropsychological testing. Functional imaging studies help in early detection and is superior to biomarkers or structural magnetic resonance imaging. Although there is no evidence supporting any pharmacological intervention, cognitive rehabilitation, memory training, and caregiver support play a strong role in limiting and sometimes reversing the ongoing cognitive decline. As the spectrum of MCI is heterogeneous, making the right diagnosis can be a challenging; hence, we need a systematic yet cost-effective algorithm for the timely management of MCI.
    American Journal of Alzheimer s Disease and Other Dementias 12/2013; 29(4). DOI:10.1177/1533317513517040 · 1.52 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Non-pharmacological interventions may improve cognition and quality of life, reduce disruptive behaviors, slow progression from Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) to dementia, and delay institutionalization. It is important to look at their trial designs as well as outcomes to understand the state of the evidence supporting non-pharmacological interventions in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). An analysis of trial design strengths and limitations may help researchers clarify treatment effect and design future studies of non-pharmacological interventions for MCI related to AD. Methods A systematic review of the methodology of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) targeting physical activity, cognitive interventions, and socialization among subjects with MCI in AD reported until March 2014 was undertaken. The primary outcome was CONSORT 2010 reporting quality. Secondary outcomes were qualitative assessments of specific methodology problems. Results 23 RCT studies met criteria for this review. Eight focused on physical activity, fourteen on cognitive interventions, and one on the effects of socialization. Most studies found a benefit with the intervention compared to control. CONSORT reporting quality of physical activity interventions was higher than that of cognitive interventions. Reporting quality of recent studies was higher than older studies, particularly with respect to sample size, control characteristics, and methodology of intervention training and delivery. However, the heterogeneity of subjects identified as having MCI and variability in interventions and outcomes continued to limit generalizability. Conclusions The role for non-pharmacological interventions targeting MCI is promising. Future studies of RCTs for non-pharmacological interventions targeting MCI related to AD may benefit by addressing design limitations.
    The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging 02/2014; 19(2). DOI:10.1007/s12603-014-0565-6 · 2.66 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
53 Downloads
Available from
May 25, 2014