| 1. |
- Jansen, Willemijn J, et al.
(författare)
-
Prevalence of cerebral amyloid pathology in persons without dementia: a meta-analysis.
- 2015
-
Ingår i: JAMA. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 1538-3598 .- 0098-7484. ; 313:19, s. 1924-38
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Cerebral amyloid-β aggregation is an early pathological event in Alzheimer disease (AD), starting decades before dementia onset. Estimates of the prevalence of amyloid pathology in persons without dementia are needed to understand the development of AD and to design prevention studies.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Caroli, Anna, et al.
(författare)
-
Mild cognitive impairment with suspected nonamyloid pathology (SNAP) Prediction of progression
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Neurology. - 0028-3878 .- 1526-632X. ; 84:5, s. 508-515
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives:The aim of this study was to investigate predictors of progressive cognitive deterioration in patients with suspected non-Alzheimer disease pathology (SNAP) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI).Methods:We measured markers of amyloid pathology (CSF -amyloid 42) and neurodegeneration (hippocampal volume on MRI and cortical metabolism on [F-18]-fluorodeoxyglucose-PET) in 201 patients with MCI clinically followed for up to 6 years to detect progressive cognitive deterioration. We categorized patients with MCI as A+/A- and N+/N- based on presence/absence of amyloid pathology and neurodegeneration. SNAPs were A-N+ cases.Results:The proportion of progressors was 11% (8/41), 34% (14/41), 56% (19/34), and 71% (60/85) in A-N-, A+N-, SNAP, and A+N+, respectively; the proportion of APOE epsilon 4 carriers was 29%, 70%, 31%, and 71%, respectively, with the SNAP group featuring a significantly different proportion than both A+N- and A+N+ groups (p 0.005). Hypometabolism in SNAP patients was comparable to A+N+ patients (p = 0.154), while hippocampal atrophy was more severe in SNAP patients (p = 0.002). Compared with A-N-, SNAP and A+N+ patients had significant risk of progressive cognitive deterioration (hazard ratio = 2.7 and 3.8, p = 0.016 and p < 0.001), while A+N- patients did not (hazard ratio = 1.13, p = 0.771). In A+N- and A+N+ groups, none of the biomarkers predicted time to progression. In the SNAP group, lower time to progression was correlated with greater hypometabolism (r = 0.42, p = 0.073).Conclusions:Our findings support the notion that patients with SNAP MCI feature a specific risk progression profile.
|
|
| 4. |
- Vos, Stephanie J. B., et al.
(författare)
-
Prevalence and prognosis of Alzheimer's disease at the mild cognitive impairment stage
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Brain. - : Oxford University Press. - 0006-8950 .- 1460-2156. ; 138:5, s. 1327-1338
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Three sets of research criteria are available for diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease in subjects with mild cognitive impairment: the International Working Group-1, International Working Group-2, and National Institute of Aging-Alzheimer Association criteria. We compared the prevalence and prognosis of Alzheimer's disease at the mild cognitive impairment stage according to these criteria. Subjects with mild cognitive impairment (n = 1607), 766 of whom had both amyloid and neuronal injury markers, were recruited from 13 cohorts. We used cognitive test performance and available biomarkers to classify subjects as prodromal Alzheimer's disease according to International Working Group-1 and International Working Group-2 criteria and in the high Alzheimer's disease likelihood group, conflicting biomarker groups (isolated amyloid pathology or suspected non-Alzheimer pathophysiology), and low Alzheimer's disease likelihood group according to the National Institute of Ageing-Alzheimer Association criteria. Outcome measures were the proportion of subjects with Alzheimer's disease at the mild cognitive impairment stage and progression to Alzheimer's disease-type dementia. We performed survival analyses using Cox proportional hazards models. According to the International Working Group-1 criteria, 850 (53%) subjects had prodromal Alzheimer's disease. Their 3-year progression rate to Alzheimer's disease-type dementia was 50% compared to 21% for subjects without prodromal Alzheimer's disease. According to the International Working Group-2 criteria, 308 (40%) subjects had prodromal Alzheimer's disease. Their 3-year progression rate to Alzheimer's disease-type dementia was 61% compared to 22% for subjects without prodromal Alzheimer's disease. According to the National Institute of Ageing-Alzheimer Association criteria, 353 (46%) subjects were in the high Alzheimer's disease likelihood group, 49 (6%) in the isolated amyloid pathology group, 220 (29%) in the suspected non-Alzheimer pathophysiology group, and 144 (19%) in the low Alzheimer's disease likelihood group. The 3-year progression rate to Alzheimer's disease-type dementia was 59% in the high Alzheimer's disease likelihood group, 22% in the isolated amyloid pathology group, 24% in the suspected non-Alzheimer pathophysiology group, and 5% in the low Alzheimer's disease likelihood group. Our findings support the use of the proposed research criteria to identify Alzheimer's disease at the mild cognitive impairment stage. In clinical settings, the use of both amyloid and neuronal injury markers as proposed by the National Institute of Ageing-Alzheimer Association criteria offers the most accurate prognosis. For clinical trials, selection of subjects in the National Institute of Ageing-Alzheimer Association high Alzheimer's disease likelihood group or the International Working Group-2 prodromal Alzheimer's disease group could be considered.
|
|
