利用基于回忆的数字认知生物标记预测 36 个月的 CDR 状态。

IF 13 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Alzheimer's & Dementia Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1002/alz.14213
Davide Bruno, Ainara Jauregi-Zinkunegi, Jason R. Bock, for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
{"title":"利用基于回忆的数字认知生物标记预测 36 个月的 CDR 状态。","authors":"Davide Bruno,&nbsp;Ainara Jauregi-Zinkunegi,&nbsp;Jason R. Bock,&nbsp;for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative","doi":"10.1002/alz.14213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> INTRODUCTION</h3>\n \n <p>Word-list recall tests are routinely used for cognitive assessment, and process scoring may improve their accuracy. We examined whether Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) derived, process-based digital cognitive biomarkers (DCBs) at baseline predicted Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) longitudinally and compared them to standard metrics.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> METHODS</h3>\n \n <p>Analyses were performed with Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) data from 330 participants (mean age = 71.4 ± 7.2). We conducted regression analyses predicting CDR at 36 months, controlling for demographics and genetic risk, with ADAS-Cog traditional scores and DCBs as predictors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> RESULTS</h3>\n \n <p>The best predictor of CDR at 36 months was <i>M</i>, a DCB reflecting recall ability (area under the curve = 0.84), outperforming traditional scores. Diagnostic results suggest that <i>M</i> may be particularly useful to identify individuals who are unlikely to decline.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\n \n <p>These results suggest that <i>M</i> outperforms ADAS-Cog traditional metrics and supports process scoring for word-list recall tests. More research is needed to determine further applicability with other tests and populations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Highlights</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Process scoring and latent modeling were more effective than traditional scoring.</li>\n \n <li>Latent recall ability (<i>M</i>) was the best predictor of Clinical Dementia Rating decline at 36 months.</li>\n \n <li>The top digital cognitive biomarker model had odds ≈ 90 times greater than the top Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive subscale model.</li>\n \n <li>Particularly high negative predictive value supports literature on cognitive testing as a useful screen.</li>\n \n <li>Consideration of both cognitive and pathological outcomes is needed.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":7471,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer's & Dementia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":13.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.14213","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Predicting CDR status over 36 months with a recall-based digital cognitive biomarker\",\"authors\":\"Davide Bruno,&nbsp;Ainara Jauregi-Zinkunegi,&nbsp;Jason R. Bock,&nbsp;for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/alz.14213\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> INTRODUCTION</h3>\\n \\n <p>Word-list recall tests are routinely used for cognitive assessment, and process scoring may improve their accuracy. We examined whether Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) derived, process-based digital cognitive biomarkers (DCBs) at baseline predicted Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) longitudinally and compared them to standard metrics.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> METHODS</h3>\\n \\n <p>Analyses were performed with Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) data from 330 participants (mean age = 71.4 ± 7.2). We conducted regression analyses predicting CDR at 36 months, controlling for demographics and genetic risk, with ADAS-Cog traditional scores and DCBs as predictors.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> RESULTS</h3>\\n \\n <p>The best predictor of CDR at 36 months was <i>M</i>, a DCB reflecting recall ability (area under the curve = 0.84), outperforming traditional scores. Diagnostic results suggest that <i>M</i> may be particularly useful to identify individuals who are unlikely to decline.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\\n \\n <p>These results suggest that <i>M</i> outperforms ADAS-Cog traditional metrics and supports process scoring for word-list recall tests. More research is needed to determine further applicability with other tests and populations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Highlights</h3>\\n \\n <div>\\n <ul>\\n \\n <li>Process scoring and latent modeling were more effective than traditional scoring.</li>\\n \\n <li>Latent recall ability (<i>M</i>) was the best predictor of Clinical Dementia Rating decline at 36 months.</li>\\n \\n <li>The top digital cognitive biomarker model had odds ≈ 90 times greater than the top Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive subscale model.</li>\\n \\n <li>Particularly high negative predictive value supports literature on cognitive testing as a useful screen.</li>\\n \\n <li>Consideration of both cognitive and pathological outcomes is needed.</li>\\n </ul>\\n </div>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alzheimer's & Dementia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.14213\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alzheimer's & Dementia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.14213\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer's & Dementia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.14213","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:单词表回忆测试是认知评估的常规方法,而过程评分可提高其准确性。我们研究了阿尔茨海默病评估量表-认知子量表(ADAS-Cog)衍生的、基于过程的数字认知生物标志物(DCBs)是否能纵向预测临床痴呆评级(CDR),并将其与标准指标进行了比较。方法我们利用阿尔茨海默病神经影像倡议(ADNI)的数据进行了分析,这些数据来自 330 名参与者(平均年龄 = 71.4 ± 7.2)。结果36个月时CDR的最佳预测指标是M,这是一种反映回忆能力的DCB(曲线下面积=0.84),优于传统得分。诊断结果表明,M 可能对识别不太可能出现智力下降的个体特别有用。讨论这些结果表明,M 优于 ADAS-Cog 传统指标,并支持单词表回忆测试的过程评分。还需要进行更多的研究,以确定该方法在其他测试和人群中的进一步适用性。潜在回忆能力(M)是预测 36 个月后临床痴呆评级下降的最佳指标。顶级数字认知生物标志物模型的几率比顶级阿尔茨海默病评估量表-认知子量表模型高出≈90倍。特别高的阴性预测值支持了将认知测试作为有用筛查手段的文献。需要同时考虑认知和病理结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Predicting CDR status over 36 months with a recall-based digital cognitive biomarker

INTRODUCTION

Word-list recall tests are routinely used for cognitive assessment, and process scoring may improve their accuracy. We examined whether Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) derived, process-based digital cognitive biomarkers (DCBs) at baseline predicted Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) longitudinally and compared them to standard metrics.

METHODS

Analyses were performed with Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) data from 330 participants (mean age = 71.4 ± 7.2). We conducted regression analyses predicting CDR at 36 months, controlling for demographics and genetic risk, with ADAS-Cog traditional scores and DCBs as predictors.

RESULTS

The best predictor of CDR at 36 months was M, a DCB reflecting recall ability (area under the curve = 0.84), outperforming traditional scores. Diagnostic results suggest that M may be particularly useful to identify individuals who are unlikely to decline.

DISCUSSION

These results suggest that M outperforms ADAS-Cog traditional metrics and supports process scoring for word-list recall tests. More research is needed to determine further applicability with other tests and populations.

Highlights

  • Process scoring and latent modeling were more effective than traditional scoring.
  • Latent recall ability (M) was the best predictor of Clinical Dementia Rating decline at 36 months.
  • The top digital cognitive biomarker model had odds ≈ 90 times greater than the top Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive subscale model.
  • Particularly high negative predictive value supports literature on cognitive testing as a useful screen.
  • Consideration of both cognitive and pathological outcomes is needed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Alzheimer's & Dementia 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
299
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Alzheimer's & Dementia is a peer-reviewed journal that aims to bridge knowledge gaps in dementia research by covering the entire spectrum, from basic science to clinical trials to social and behavioral investigations. It provides a platform for rapid communication of new findings and ideas, optimal translation of research into practical applications, increasing knowledge across diverse disciplines for early detection, diagnosis, and intervention, and identifying promising new research directions. In July 2008, Alzheimer's & Dementia was accepted for indexing by MEDLINE, recognizing its scientific merit and contribution to Alzheimer's research.
期刊最新文献
Technology that CARES: Enhancing dementia care through everyday technologies SV2A PET shows hippocampal synaptic loss in cognitively unimpaired APOE ε4/ε4 homozygotes 2024 AA criteria for Alzheimer's disease diagnosis: Mainly anchored at Aβ not tau. A short version of the Everyday Cognition scale can predict clinical progression and cognitive decline. Impact of skilled nursing facility quality on Medicare beneficiaries with dementia: Evidence from vacancies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1