Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:In this multicenter study on subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in community-based and memory clinic settings, we assessed the (1) incidence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and non-AD dementia and (2) determinants of progression to dementia. METHODS:Eleven cohorts provided 2978 participants with SCD and 1391 controls. We estimated dementia incidence and identified risk factors using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS:In SCD, incidence of dementia was 17.7 (95% Poisson confidence interval 15.2-20.3)/1000 person-years (AD: 11.5 [9.6-13.7], non-AD: 6.1 [4.7-7.7]), compared with 14.2 (11.3-17.6) in controls (AD: 10.1 [7.7-13.0], non-AD: 4.1 [2.6-6.0]). The risk of dementia was strongly increased in SCD in a memory clinic setting but less so in a community-based setting. In addition, higher age (hazard ratio 1.1 [95% confidence interval 1.1-1.1]), lower Mini-Mental State Examination (0.7 [0.66-0.8]), and apolipoprotein E ε4 (1.8 [1.3-2.5]) increased the risk of dementia. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:SCD can precede both AD and non-AD dementia. Despite their younger age, individuals with SCD in a memory clinic setting have a higher risk of dementia than those in community-based cohorts.

BACKGROUND:Little is known with respect to behavioral markers of subjective cognitive decline (SCD), a condition initially described in association with Global Deterioration Scale (GDS) stage 2. OBJECTIVE:Two-year interval behavioral markers were investigated herein. METHODS:Subjects from a published 7-year outcome study of GDS stage 2 subjects were selected. This study had demonstrated a hazard ratio of 4.5 for progression of GDS stage 2, in comparison with GDS stage 1 (no subjective or objective cognitive decline) subjects, after controlling for demographic and temporal variables. Because GDS 2 subjects have previously demonstrated impairment in comparison with healthy persons free of complaints, we herein suggest the terminology "SCD(I)" for these persons. 98 SCD(I) persons, 63 women and 35 men, mean baseline age, 67.12±8.75 years, with a mean educational background of 15.55±2.60 years, and mean baseline MMSE scores of 28.9±1.24 were followed for 2.13±0.30 years. RESULTS:Observed annual decline on the GDS was 6.701% per annum, very close to a 1986 published estimate. At follow up, the MMSE, and 7 of 8 psychometric tests did not decline significantly. Of 21 Hamilton Depression Scale items, 2 improved and the remainder were unchanged. Anxieties declined from multiple perspectives. The Brief Cognitive Rating Scale (BCRS) declined significantly (p < 0.001), with component declines in Remote memory (p < 0.01), and Functioning/self-care (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:SCD(I) persons decline at an annual rate of approximately 6.7% /year from several recent studies. The BCRS assessments and the Digit Symbol Substitution Test can be sensitive measures for future studies of progression mitigation.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim was to examine added benefits of a Comprehensive, Individualized, Person-Centered Management (CI-PCM) program to memantine treatment. METHODS: This was a 28-week, clinician-blinded, randomized, controlled, parallel-group study, with a similar study population, similar eligibility criteria, and a similar design to the memantine pivotal trial of Reisberg et al. [N Engl J Med 2003;348:1333-1341]. Twenty eligible community-residing Alzheimer disease (AD) subject-caregiver dyads were randomized to the CI-PCM program (n = 10) or to usual community care (n = 10). Primary outcomes were the New York University Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input (NYU-CIBIC-Plus), assessed by one clinician set, and an activities of daily living inventory, assessed by a separate clinician set at baseline and at weeks 4, 12, and 28. RESULTS: Primary outcomes showed significant benefits of the CI-PCM program at all post-baseline evaluations. Improvement on the NYU-CIBIC-Plus in the management group at 28 weeks was 2.9 points over the comparator group. The memantine 2003 trial showed an improvement of 0.3 points on this global measure in memantine-treated versus placebo-randomized subjects at 28 weeks. Hence, globally, the management program intervention benefits were 967% greater than memantine treatment alone. CONCLUSION: These results are approximately 10 times those usually observed with both nonpharmacological and pharmacological treatments and indicate substantial benefits with the management program for advanced AD persons.

There is increasing evidence that subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in individuals with unimpaired performance on cognitive tests may represent the first symptomatic manifestation of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The research on SCD in early AD, however, is limited by the absence of common standards. The working group of the Subjective Cognitive Decline Initiative (SCD-I) addressed this deficiency by reaching consensus on terminology and on a conceptual framework for research on SCD in AD. In this publication, research criteria for SCD in pre-mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are presented. In addition, a list of core features proposed for reporting in SCD studies is provided, which will enable comparability of research across different settings. Finally, a set of features is presented, which in accordance with current knowledge, increases the likelihood of the presence of preclinical AD in individuals with SCD. This list is referred to as SCD plus.

Background: Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) and associated disturbances in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are a source of distress and burden for spouses, professional caregivers, and others with responsibilities for the care of individuals with AD. BPSD with behavioral disturbances are also associated with more rapid institutionalization and increased morbidity and mortality for persons with AD. Objectives: In this review and commentary, we discuss the history of the development of BPSD and behavioral disturbance assessments, which are distinct from those evaluating cognitive and functional symptoms of AD. In particular, we review the informant-based Behavioral Pathology in Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (BEHAVE-AD), the related, potentially more sensitive, BEHAVE-AD Frequency-Weighted Severity Scale (BEHAVE-AD-FW), and the direct subject evaluation-based Empirical BEHAVE-AD Rating Scale (E-BEHAVE-AD). The kinds of medications that alleviate behavioral symptoms on these measures as well as the problems and possibilities for further advances with these medications are discussed. Finally, the importance of distinguishing BPSD and behavioral disturbance remediation in AD from the treatment of cognitive decline and other aspects of AD is emphasized in the context of appropriate assessment methodology. The objective of this paper is to provide a framework for further advances in the treatment of BPSD and associated behavioral disturbances in AD and, consequently, a framework for continuing improvements in the lives of individuals with AD and those who share the burden of the disease with the AD person. (c) 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel.

OBJECTIVE: To inform whether the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) should change its policy of not returning research results to ADNI participants, we surveyed investigators and research staff about disclosing ADNI biomarker information to research participants, with particular emphasis on amyloid imaging results. METHODS: In April 2012, just before Food and Drug Administration approval of the amyloid-binding radiotracer, florbetapir, all ADNI investigators and personnel were recruited to complete an anonymous online survey that contained fixed choice and free-text questions. RESULTS: Although ADNI participants often requested amyloid imaging results (the proportions of investigators who reported requests from more than half of their participants with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment were 20% and 22%, respectively), across all diagnostic groups, the majority of ADNI investigators (approximately 90%) did not return amyloid imaging results to ADNI participants. However, the majority of investigators reported that, if the Food and Drug Administration approved florbetapir, they would support the return of amyloid imaging results to participants with mild cognitive impairment and normal cognition, but they emphasized the need for guidance on how to provide these results to participants and for research to assess the value of returning results as well as how returning results will affect study validity and participant well-being. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of ADNI investigators support returning amyloid imaging results to ADNI participants. The findings that they want guidance on how to do this and research on the impact of disclosure suggest how to develop and monitor a disclosure process.