| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Solomon, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Multidomain interventions: state-of-the-art and future directions for protocols to implement precision dementia risk reduction. A user manual for Brain Health Services-part 4 of 6
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Alzheimer's research & therapy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1758-9193. ; 13:1, s. 171-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Although prevention of dementia and late-life cognitive decline is a major public health priority, there are currently no generally established prevention strategies or operational models for implementing such strategies into practice. This article is a narrative review of available evidence from multidomain dementia prevention trials targeting several risk factors and disease mechanisms simultaneously, in individuals without dementia at baseline. Based on the findings, we formulate recommendations for implementing precision risk reduction strategies into new services called Brain Health Services. A literature search was conducted using medical databases (MEDLINE via PubMed and SCOPUS) to select relevant studies: non-pharmacological multidomain interventions (i.e., combining two or more intervention domains), target population including individuals without dementia, and primary outcomes including cognitive/functional performance changes and/or incident cognitive impairment or dementia. Further literature searches covered the following topics: sub-group analyses assessing potential modifiers for the intervention effect on cognition in the multidomain prevention trials, dementia risk scores used as surrogate outcomes in multidomain prevention trials, dementia risk scores in relation to brain pathology markers, and cardiovascular risk scores in relation to dementia. Multidomain intervention studies conducted so far appear to have mixed results and substantial variability in target populations, format and intensity of interventions, choice of control conditions, and outcome measures. Most trials were conducted in high-income countries. The differences in design between the larger, longer-term trials that met vs. did not meet their primary outcomes suggest that multidomain intervention effectiveness may be dependent on a precision prevention approach, i.e., successfully identifying the at-risk groups who are most likely to benefit. One such successful trial has already developed an operational model for implementing the intervention into practice. Evidence on the efficacy of risk reduction interventions is promising, but not yet conclusive. More long-term multidomain randomized controlled trials are needed to fill the current evidence gaps, especially concerning low- and middle-income countries and integration of dementia prevention with existing cerebrovascular prevention programs. A precision risk reduction approach may be most effective for dementia prevention. Such an approach could be implemented in Brain Health Services.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Vermunt, L., et al.
(författare)
-
Prescreening for European Prevention of Alzheimer Dementia (EPAD) trial-ready cohort: impact of AD risk factors and recruitment settings
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Alzheimer's Research & Therapy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1758-9193. ; 12:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Recruitment is often a bottleneck in secondary prevention trials in Alzheimer disease (AD). Furthermore, screen-failure rates in these trials are typically high due to relatively low prevalence of AD pathology in individuals without dementia, especially among cognitively unimpaired. Prescreening on AD risk factors may facilitate recruitment, but the efficiency will depend on how these factors link to participation rates and AD pathology. We investigated whether common AD-related factors predict trial-ready cohort participation and amyloid status across different prescreen settings. Methods We monitored the prescreening in four cohorts linked to the European Prevention of Alzheimer Dementia (EPAD) Registry (n = 16,877; mean +/- SD age = 64 +/- 8 years). These included a clinical cohort, a research in-person cohort, a research online cohort, and a population-based cohort. Individuals were asked to participate in the EPAD longitudinal cohort study (EPAD-LCS), which serves as a trial-ready cohort for secondary prevention trials. Amyloid positivity was measured in cerebrospinal fluid as part of the EPAD-LCS assessment. We calculated participation rates and numbers needed to prescreen (NNPS) per participant that was amyloid-positive. We tested if age, sex, education level, APOE status, family history for dementia, memory complaints or memory scores, previously collected in these cohorts, could predict participation and amyloid status. Results A total of 2595 participants were contacted for participation in the EPAD-LCS. Participation rates varied by setting between 3 and 59%. The NNPS were 6.9 (clinical cohort), 7.5 (research in-person cohort), 8.4 (research online cohort), and 88.5 (population-based cohort). Participation in the EPAD-LCS (n = 413 (16%)) was associated with lower age (odds ratio (OR) age = 0.97 [0.95-0.99]), high education (OR = 1.64 [1.23-2.17]), male sex (OR = 1.56 [1.19-2.04]), and positive family history of dementia (OR = 1.66 [1.19-2.31]). Among participants in the EPAD-LCS, amyloid positivity (33%) was associated with higher age (OR = 1.06 [1.02-1.10]) and APOE e4 allele carriership (OR = 2.99 [1.81-4.94]). These results were similar across prescreen settings. Conclusions Numbers needed to prescreen varied greatly between settings. Understanding how common AD risk factors link to study participation and amyloid positivity is informative for recruitment strategy of studies on secondary prevention of AD.
|
|
