Kevin Duff, D. Hammers, Vincent Koppelmans, J. King, John M. Hoffman
{"title":"短期练习对晚年认知测试的影响及其与阿尔茨海默病生物标志物的比较","authors":"Kevin Duff, D. Hammers, Vincent Koppelmans, J. King, John M. Hoffman","doi":"10.3233/jad-231392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Practice effects on cognitive testing in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) remain understudied, especially with how they compare to biomarkers of AD. Objective: The current study sought to add to this growing literature. Methods: Cognitively intact older adults (n = 68), those with amnestic MCI (n = 52), and those with mild AD (n = 45) completed a brief battery of cognitive tests at baseline and again after one week, and they also completed a baseline amyloid PET scan, a baseline MRI, and a baseline blood draw to obtain APOE ɛ4 status. Results: The intact participants showed significantly larger baseline cognitive scores and practice effects than the other two groups on overall composite measures. Those with MCI showed significantly larger baseline scores and practice effects than AD participants on the composite. For amyloid deposition, the intact participants had significantly less tracer uptake, whereas MCI and AD participants were comparable. For total hippocampal volumes, all three groups were significantly different in the expected direction (intact > MCI > AD). For APOE ɛ4, the intact had significantly fewer copies of ɛ4 than MCI and AD. The effect sizes of the baseline cognitive scores and practice effects were comparable, and they were significantly larger than effect sizes of biomarkers in 7 of the 9 comparisons. Conclusion: Baseline cognition and short-term practice effects appear to be sensitive markers in late life cognitive disorders, as they separated groups better than commonly-used biomarkers in AD. Further development of baseline cognition and short-term practice effects as tools for clinical diagnosis, prognostic indication, and enrichment of clinical trials seems warranted.","PeriodicalId":14929,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Alzheimer's Disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Short-Term Practice Effects on Cognitive Tests Across the Late Life Cognitive Spectrum and How They Compare to Biomarkers of Alzheimer’s Disease\",\"authors\":\"Kevin Duff, D. Hammers, Vincent Koppelmans, J. King, John M. Hoffman\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/jad-231392\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Practice effects on cognitive testing in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) remain understudied, especially with how they compare to biomarkers of AD. Objective: The current study sought to add to this growing literature. Methods: Cognitively intact older adults (n = 68), those with amnestic MCI (n = 52), and those with mild AD (n = 45) completed a brief battery of cognitive tests at baseline and again after one week, and they also completed a baseline amyloid PET scan, a baseline MRI, and a baseline blood draw to obtain APOE ɛ4 status. Results: The intact participants showed significantly larger baseline cognitive scores and practice effects than the other two groups on overall composite measures. Those with MCI showed significantly larger baseline scores and practice effects than AD participants on the composite. For amyloid deposition, the intact participants had significantly less tracer uptake, whereas MCI and AD participants were comparable. For total hippocampal volumes, all three groups were significantly different in the expected direction (intact > MCI > AD). For APOE ɛ4, the intact had significantly fewer copies of ɛ4 than MCI and AD. The effect sizes of the baseline cognitive scores and practice effects were comparable, and they were significantly larger than effect sizes of biomarkers in 7 of the 9 comparisons. Conclusion: Baseline cognition and short-term practice effects appear to be sensitive markers in late life cognitive disorders, as they separated groups better than commonly-used biomarkers in AD. Further development of baseline cognition and short-term practice effects as tools for clinical diagnosis, prognostic indication, and enrichment of clinical trials seems warranted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Alzheimer's Disease\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Alzheimer's Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-231392\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Alzheimer's Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-231392","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:实践对轻度认知障碍(MCI)和阿尔茨海默病(AD)认知测试的影响仍未得到充分研究,尤其是这些影响与阿尔茨海默病生物标志物的比较。研究目的目前的研究旨在为这一不断增长的文献添砖加瓦。研究方法认知功能完好的老年人(68 人)、有记忆障碍的 MCI 患者(52 人)和轻度 AD 患者(45 人)分别在基线时和一周后完成了一系列简短的认知测试,他们还完成了基线淀粉样蛋白 PET 扫描、基线核磁共振成像和基线抽血以获得 APOE ɛ4 状态。结果显示与其他两组相比,完整参与者的基线认知分数和练习效果在整体综合测量中明显更高。在综合指标上,MCI 患者的基线得分和练习效果明显高于 AD 患者。在淀粉样蛋白沉积方面,完整参与者的示踪剂摄取量明显较少,而MCI和AD参与者的示踪剂摄取量相当。在海马总体积方面,所有三个组别都在预期方向上存在显著差异(完好> MCI > AD)。至于 APOE ɛ4,完好者的ɛ4拷贝数明显少于 MCI 和 AD。基线认知评分的效应大小与实践效应相当,在 9 项比较中,有 7 项的效应大小明显大于生物标志物的效应大小。结论基线认知评分和短期练习效果似乎是晚年认知障碍的敏感标志物,因为它们比常见的注意力缺失症生物标志物更能区分组别。看来有必要进一步开发基线认知和短期实践效应,将其作为临床诊断、预后指示和丰富临床试验的工具。
Short-Term Practice Effects on Cognitive Tests Across the Late Life Cognitive Spectrum and How They Compare to Biomarkers of Alzheimer’s Disease
Background: Practice effects on cognitive testing in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) remain understudied, especially with how they compare to biomarkers of AD. Objective: The current study sought to add to this growing literature. Methods: Cognitively intact older adults (n = 68), those with amnestic MCI (n = 52), and those with mild AD (n = 45) completed a brief battery of cognitive tests at baseline and again after one week, and they also completed a baseline amyloid PET scan, a baseline MRI, and a baseline blood draw to obtain APOE ɛ4 status. Results: The intact participants showed significantly larger baseline cognitive scores and practice effects than the other two groups on overall composite measures. Those with MCI showed significantly larger baseline scores and practice effects than AD participants on the composite. For amyloid deposition, the intact participants had significantly less tracer uptake, whereas MCI and AD participants were comparable. For total hippocampal volumes, all three groups were significantly different in the expected direction (intact > MCI > AD). For APOE ɛ4, the intact had significantly fewer copies of ɛ4 than MCI and AD. The effect sizes of the baseline cognitive scores and practice effects were comparable, and they were significantly larger than effect sizes of biomarkers in 7 of the 9 comparisons. Conclusion: Baseline cognition and short-term practice effects appear to be sensitive markers in late life cognitive disorders, as they separated groups better than commonly-used biomarkers in AD. Further development of baseline cognition and short-term practice effects as tools for clinical diagnosis, prognostic indication, and enrichment of clinical trials seems warranted.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Alzheimer''s Disease (JAD) is an international multidisciplinary journal to facilitate progress in understanding the etiology, pathogenesis, epidemiology, genetics, behavior, treatment and psychology of Alzheimer''s disease. The journal publishes research reports, reviews, short communications, hypotheses, ethics reviews, book reviews, and letters-to-the-editor. The journal is dedicated to providing an open forum for original research that will expedite our fundamental understanding of Alzheimer''s disease.