Flavio Nobili’s research while affiliated with University of Genoa and other places

Background Functional cognitive disorder (FCD) poses a diagnostic challenge due to its resemblance to other neurocognitive disorders and limited biomarker accuracy. We aimed to develop a new diagnostic checklist to identify FCD versus other neurocognitive disorders. Methods The clinical checklist was developed through mixed methods: (1) a literature review, (2) a three-round Delphi study with 45 clinicians from 12 countries and (3) a pilot discriminative accuracy study in consecutive patients attending seven memory services across the UK. Items gathering consensus were incorporated into a pilot checklist. Item redundancy was evaluated with phi coefficients. A briefer checklist was produced by removing items with >10% missing data. Internal validity was tested using Cronbach’s alpha. Optimal cut-off scores were determined using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results A full 11-item checklist and a 7-item briefer checklist were produced. Overall, 239 patients (143 FCD, 96 non-FCD diagnoses) were included. The checklist scores were significantly different across subgroups (FCD and other neurocognitive disorders) (F(2, 236)=313.3, p<0.001). The area under the curve was excellent for both the full checklist (0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99) and its brief version (0.96, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.98). Optimal cut-off scores corresponded to a specificity of 97% and positive predictive value of 91% for identifying FCD. Both versions showed good internal validity (>0.80). Conclusions This pilot study shows that a brief clinical checklist may serve as a quick complementary tool to differentiate patients with neurodegeneration from those with FCD. Prospective blind large-scale validation in diverse populations is warranted.

Background Lifestyle factors have been associated with the risk of dementia, but the association with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) remains unclear. Objective To examine the association between later life lifestyle factors and AD biomarkers (i.e., amyloid-β 1–42 (Aβ42) and tau in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and hippocampal volume) in individuals with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). In addition, to examine the effect of later life lifestyle factors on developing AD-type dementia in individuals with MCI. Methods We selected individuals with SCD (n = 111) and MCI (n = 353) from the DESCRIPA and Kuopio Longitudinal MCI studies. CSF Aβ42 and tau concentrations were assessed with ELISA assay and hippocampal volume with multi-atlas segmentation. Lifestyle was assessed by clinical interview at baseline for: social activity, physical activity, cognitive activity, smoking, alcohol consumption, and sleep. We performed logistic and Cox regression analyses adjusted for study site, age, gender, education, and diagnosis. Prediction for AD-type dementia was performed in individuals with MCI only. Results Later life lifestyle factors were not associated with AD biomarkers or with conversion to AD-type dementia. AD biomarkers were strongly associated with conversion to AD-type dementia, but these relations were not modulated by lifestyle factors. Apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype did not influence the results. Conclusions Later life lifestyle factors had no impact on key AD biomarkers in individuals with SCD and MCI or on conversion to AD-type dementia in MCI.

Introduction Systemic inflammation and endothelial dysfunction are potentially modifiable factors implicated in Alzheimer’s disease (AD), which offer potential therapeutic targets to slow disease progression. Methods We investigated the relationship between baseline circulating levels of inflammatory (TNF-α, IL-1ß) and endothelial cell markers (VCAM-1, ICAM-1, E-selectin) and 18-month cognitive decline (ADAS-cog12) in 266 mild-to-moderate AD patients from the NILVAD study. We employed individual growth models to examine associations, potential mediation, and interaction effects while adjusting for confounders. Results The average increase in ADAS-cog12 scores over all patients was 8.1 points in 18 months. No significant association was found between the markers and the rate of cognitive decline. Mediation analysis revealed no mediating role for endothelial cell markers, and interaction effects were not observed. Discussion Our results do not support the role of systemic inflammation or endothelial dysfunction in progression in persons with AD.

Background Current proposed criteria for functional cognitive disorder (FCD) have not been externally validated. We sought to analyse the current perspectives of cognitive specialists in the diagnosis and management of FCD in comparison with neurodegenerative conditions. Methods International experts in cognitive disorders were invited to assess seven illustrative clinical vignettes containing history and bedside characteristics alone. Participants assigned a probable diagnosis and selected the appropriate investigation and treatment. Qualitative, quantitative and inter‐rater agreement analyses were undertaken. Results Eighteen diagnostic terminologies were assigned by 45 cognitive experts from 12 countries with a median of 13 years of experience, across the seven scenarios. Accurate discrimination between FCD and neurodegeneration was observed, independently of background and years of experience: 100% of the neurodegenerative vignettes were correctly classified and 75%–88% of the FCD diagnoses were attributed to non‐neurodegenerative causes. There was <50% agreement in the terminology used for FCD, in comparison with 87%–92% agreement for neurodegenerative syndromes. Blood tests and neuropsychological evaluation were the leading diagnostic modalities for FCD. Diagnostic communication, psychotherapy and psychiatry referral were the main suggested management strategies in FCD. Conclusions Our study demonstrates the feasibility of distinguishing between FCD and neurodegeneration based on relevant patient characteristics and history details. These characteristics need further validation and operationalisation. Heterogeneous labelling and framing pose clinical and research challenges reflecting a lack of agreement in the field. Careful consideration of FCD diagnosis is advised, particularly in the presence of comorbidities. This study informs future research on diagnostic tools and evidence‐based interventions.

Background The burden of Parkinson Disease (PD) represents a key public health issue and it is essential to develop innovative and cost-effective approaches to promote sustainable diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. In this perspective the adoption of a P3 (predictive, preventive and personalized) medicine approach seems to be pivotal. The NeuroArtP3 (NET-2018-12366666) is a four-year multi-site project co-funded by the Italian Ministry of Health, bringing together clinical and computational centers operating in the field of neurology, including PD. Objective The core objectives of the project are: i) to harmonize the collection of data across the participating centers, ii) to structure standardized disease-specific datasets and iii) to advance knowledge on disease’s trajectories through machine learning analysis. Methods The 4-years study combines two consecutive research components: i) a multi-center retrospective observational phase; ii) a multi-center prospective observational phase. The retrospective phase aims at collecting data of the patients admitted at the participating clinical centers. Whereas the prospective phase aims at collecting the same variables of the retrospective study in newly diagnosed patients who will be enrolled at the same centers. Results The participating clinical centers are the Provincial Health Services (APSS) of Trento (Italy) as the center responsible for the PD study and the IRCCS San Martino Hospital of Genoa (Italy) as the promoter center of the NeuroartP3 project. The computational centers responsible for data analysis are the Bruno Kessler Foundation of Trento (Italy) with TrentinoSalute4.0 –Competence Center for Digital Health of the Province of Trento (Italy) and the LISCOMPlab University of Genoa (Italy). Conclusions The work behind this observational study protocol shows how it is possible and viable to systematize data collection procedures in order to feed research and to advance the implementation of a P3 approach into the clinical practice through the use of AI models.

Objective: To apply a machine learning analysis to clinical and presynaptic dopaminergic imaging data of patients with rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (RBD) to predict the development of Parkinson disease (PD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). Methods: In this multicenter study of the International RBD study group, 173 patients (mean age 70.5 ± 6.3 years, 70.5% males) with polysomnography-confirmed RBD who eventually phenoconverted to overt alpha-synucleinopathy (RBD due to synucleinopathy) were enrolled, and underwent baseline presynaptic dopaminergic imaging and clinical assessment, including motor, cognitive, olfaction, and constipation evaluation. For comparison, 232 RBD non-phenoconvertor patients (67.6 ± 7.1 years, 78.4% males) and 160 controls (68.2 ± 7.2 years, 53.1% males) were enrolled. Imaging and clinical features were analyzed by machine learning to determine predictors of phenoconversion. Results: Machine learning analysis showed that clinical data alone poorly predicted phenoconversion. Presynaptic dopaminergic imaging significantly improved the prediction, especially in combination with clinical data, with 77% sensitivity and 85% specificity in differentiating RBD due to synucleinopathy from non phenoconverted RBD patients, and 85% sensitivity and 86% specificity in discriminating PD-converters from DLB-converters. Quantification of presynaptic dopaminergic imaging showed that an empirical z-score cutoff of −1.0 at the most affected hemisphere putamen characterized RBD due to synucleinopathy patients, while a cutoff of −1.0 at the most affected hemisphere putamen/caudate ratio characterized PD-converters. Interpretation: Clinical data alone poorly predicted phenoconversion in RBD due to synucleinopathy patients. Conversely, presynaptic dopaminergic imaging allows a good prediction of forthcoming phenoconversion diagnosis. This finding may be used in designing future disease-modifying trials.

The recent commercialisation of the first disease-modifying drugs for Alzheimer's disease emphasises the need for consensus recommendations on the rational use of biomarkers to diagnose people with suspected neurocognitive disorders in memory clinics. Most available recommendations and guidelines are either disease-centred or biomarker-centred. A European multidisciplinary taskforce consisting of 22 experts from 11 European scientific societies set out to define the first patient-centred diagnostic workflow that aims to prioritise testing for available biomarkers in individuals attending memory clinics. After an extensive literature review, we used a Delphi consensus procedure to identify 11 clinical syndromes, based on clinical history and examination, neuropsychology, blood tests, structural imaging, and, in some cases, EEG. We recommend first-line and, if needed, second-line testing for biomarkers according to the patient's clinical profile and the results of previous biomarker findings. This diagnostic workflow will promote consistency in the diagnosis of neurocognitive disorders across European countries.

Purpose Epidemiological and logistical reasons are slowing the clinical validation of the molecular imaging biomarkers in the initial stages of neurocognitive disorders. We provide an updated systematic review of the recent advances (2017–2022), highlighting methodological shortcomings. Methods Studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy values of the molecular imaging techniques (i.e., amyloid-, tau-, [18F]FDG-PETs, DaT-SPECT, and cardiac [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy) in predicting progression from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia were selected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) method and evaluated with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Main eligibility criteria were as follows: (1) ≥ 50 subjects with MCI, (2) follow-up ≥ 3 years, (3) gold standard: progression to dementia or diagnosis on pathology, and (4) measures of prospective accuracy. Results Sensitivity (SE) and specificity (SP) in predicting progression to dementia, mainly to Alzheimer’s dementia were 43–100% and 63–94% for [¹⁸F]FDG-PET and 64–94% and 48–93% for amyloid-PET. Longitudinal studies were lacking for less common disorders (Dementia with Lewy bodies-DLB and Frontotemporal lobe degeneration-FTLD) and for tau-PET, DaT-SPECT, and [123I]-MIBG scintigraphy. Therefore, the accuracy values from cross-sectional studies in a smaller sample of subjects (n > 20, also including mild dementia stage) were chosen as surrogate outcomes. DaT-SPECT showed 47–100% SE and 71–100% SP in differentiating Lewy body disease (LBD) from non-LBD conditions; tau-PET: 88% SE and 100% SP in differentiating DLB from Posterior Cortical Atrophy. [¹²³I]-MIBG scintigraphy differentiated LBD from non-LBD conditions with 47–100% SE and 71–100% SP. Conclusion Molecular imaging has a moderate-to-good accuracy in predicting the progression of MCI to Alzheimer’s dementia. Longitudinal studies are sparse in non-AD conditions, requiring additional efforts in these settings.