Search

• What is the primary question addressed by this study? What are the cognitive profiles of older adults with remitted major depressive disorder (rMDD) with or without mild cognitive impairment (MCI)? How do these profiles differ in terms of clinical, demographic, and brain structure features? • What is the main finding of this study? Using latent profile analysis, we identified three cognitive profiles, with differences in cognition, physical health, education, and brain structure. • What is the meaning of the finding? Older patients with rMDD can be grouped cross-sectionally based on distinct data-driven cognitive profiles that differ from the absence or presence of a diagnosis of MCI. To identify data-driven cognitive profiles in older adults with remitted major depressive disorder (rMDD) with or without mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and examine how the profiles differ regarding demographic, clinical, and neuroimaging measures. Secondary cross-sectional analysis using latent profile analysis. Multisite clinical trial in Toronto, Canada. One hundred seventy-eight participants who met DSM-5 criteria for rMDD without MCI (rMDD-MCI; n = 60) or with MCI (rMDD + MCI; n = 118). Demographic, clinical, neuroimaging measures, and domain scores from a neuropsychological battery assessing verbal memory, visuospatial memory, processing speed, working memory, language, and executive function. We identified three latent profiles: Profile 1 (poor cognition ; n = 75, 42.1%), Profile 2 (intermediate cognition ; n = 75, 42.1%), and Profile 3 (normal cognition ; n = 28, 15.7%). Compared to participants with Profile 3, those with Profile 1 or 2 were older, had lower education, experienced a greater burden of medical comorbidities, and were more likely to have MCI. The profiles did not differ on the severity of residual symptoms, age of onset of rMDD, number of depressive episodes, psychotropic medication, cerebrovascular risk, ApoE4 carrier status, or family history of depression, dementia, or Alzheimer's disease. The profiles differed in cortical thickness of 15 regions, with the most prominent effects for left precentral and pars opercularis, and right inferior parietal and supramarginal. Older patients with rMDD can be grouped cross-sectionally based on data-driven cognitive profiles that differ from the absence or presence of a diagnosis of MCI. Future research should determine the differential risk for dementia of these data-driven subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• What is the primary question addressed by this study? Do clinical characteristics of participants in the ADMET 2 trial predict better response to methylphenidate for the treatment of apathy in Alzheimer's disease? • What is the main finding of this study? Participants without anxiety or agitation, who were younger, taking a cholinesterase inhibitor, with 73–80 mm Hg diastolic blood pressure, having low functional capacity, were found to respond better to methylphenidate. Combining these characteristics in a multivariate model provided individualized prediction of treatment response. • What is the meaning of the finding? These clinical characteristics may affect the efficacy of methylphenidate in treating apathy, and may help clinicians identify patients most likely to respond to treatment. The Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2) found that methylphenidate was effective in treating apathy with a small-to-medium effect size but showed heterogeneity in response. We assessed clinical predictors of response to help determine individual likelihood of treatment benefit from methylphenidate. Univariate and multivariate analyses of 22 clinical predictors of response chosen a priori. Data from the ADMET 2 randomized, placebo controlled multi-center clinical trial. Alzheimer's disease patients with clinically significant apathy. Apathy assessed with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory apathy domain (NPI-A). In total, 177 participants (67% male, mean [SD] age 76.4 [7.9], mini-mental state examination 19.3 [4.8]) had 6-months follow up data. Six potential predictors met criteria for inclusion in multivariate modeling. Methylphenidate was more efficacious in participants without NPI anxiety (change in NPI-A -2.21, standard error [SE]:0.60) or agitation (-2.63, SE:0.68), prescribed cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEI) (-2.44, SE:0.62), between 52 and 72 years of age (-2.93, SE:1.05), had 73–80 mm Hg diastolic blood pressure (-2.43, SE: 1.03), and more functional impairment (-2.56, SE:1.16) as measured by the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living scale. Individuals who were not anxious or agitated, younger, prescribed a ChEI, with optimal (73–80 mm Hg) diastolic blood pressure, or having more impaired function were more likely to benefit from methylphenidate compared to placebo. Clinicians may preferentially consider methylphenidate for apathetic AD participants already prescribed a ChEI and without baseline anxiety or agitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Apathy is one of the most prevalent, stable and persistent neuropsychiatric symptom across the neurocognitive disorders spectrum. Recent advances in understanding of phenomenology, neurobiology and intervention trials highlight apathy as an important target for clinical intervention. We conducted a comprehensive review and critical evaluation of recent advances to determine the evidence-based suggestions for future trial designs. This review focused on 4 key areas: 1) pre-dementia states; 2) assessment; 3) mechanisms/biomarkers and 4) treatment/intervention efficacy. Considerable progress has been made in understanding apathy as a treatment target and appreciating pharmacological and non-pharmacological apathy treatment interventions. Areas requiring greater investigation include: diagnostic procedures, symptom measurement, understanding the biological mechanisms/biomarkers of apathy, and a well-formed approach to the development of treatment strategies. A better understanding of the subdomains and biological mechanisms of apathy will advance apathy as a treatment target for clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Diagnostic criteria for apathy have been published but have yet to be evaluated in the context of clinical trials. The Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2) operationalized the diagnostic criteria for apathy (DCA) into a clinician-rated questionnaire informed by interviews with the patient and caregiver.Objective: The goal of the present study was to compare the classification of apathy using the DCA with that using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-apathy (NPI-apathy) subscale in ADMET 2. Comparisons between NPI-Apathy and Dementia Apathy Interview Rating (DAIR) scale, and DCA and DAIR were also explored.Methods: ADMET 2 is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial examining the effects of 20 mg/day methylphenidate on symptoms of apathy over 6 months in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). Participants scoring at least 4 on the NPI-Apathy were recruited. This analysis focuses on cross-sectional correlations between baseline apathy scale scores using cross-tabulation.Results: Of 180 participants, the median age was 76.5 years and they were predominantly white (92.8%) and male (66.1%). The mean (±standard deviation) scores were 7.7 ± 2.4 on the NPI-apathy, and 1.9 ± 0.5 on the DAIR. Of those with NPI-defined apathy, 169 (93.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 89.3%-96.9%) met DCA diagnostic criteria. The DCA and DAIR overlapped on apathy diagnosis for 169 participants (93.9%, 95% CI 89.3%-96.9%).Conclusion: The measurements used for the assessment of apathy in patients with AD had a high degree of overlap with the DCA. The NPI-apathy cut-off used to determine apathy in ADMET 2 selects those likely to meet DCA criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The public health burden of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is related not only to cognitive symptoms, but also to neuropsychiatric symptoms, including apathy. Apathy is defined as a quantitative reduction of goal-directed activity in comparison to a previous level of functioning and affects 30%-70% of persons with AD. Previous attempts to treat apathy in AD-both nonpharmacologically and pharmacologically-have been wanting. Catecholaminergic treatment with methylphenidate has shown encouraging results in initial trials of apathy in AD. Understanding the neuronal circuits underlying motivated behavior and their reliance on catecholamine actions helps provide a rationale for methylphenidate actions in the treatment of apathy in patients with AD. Anatomical, physiological, and behavioral studies have identified parallel, cortical-basal ganglia circuits that govern action, cognition, and emotion and play key roles in motivated behavior. Understanding the distinct contributions to motivated behavior of subregions of the prefrontal cortex-dorsolateral, orbital-ventromedial, and dorsomedial-helps to explain why degeneration of these areas in AD results in apathetic behaviors. We propose that the degeneration of the prefrontal cortex in AD produces symptoms of apathy. We further propose that methylphenidate treatment may ameliorate those symptoms by boosting norepinephrine and dopamine actions in prefrontal-striatal-thalamocortical circuits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of nabilone for agitation in patients with moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease (AD).Design: This 14-week randomized double-blind crossover trial compared nabilone to placebo (6 weeks each) with a 1-week washout between phases.Setting: Patients were recruited from a long-term care facility and geriatric psychiatry clinics.Participants: Patients had AD (standardized Mini-Mental State Examination [sMMSE ≤24]) and agitation (Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home version [NPI-NH]-agitation/aggression subscore ≥3).Intervention: Nabilone (target 1-2 mg) versus placebo.Measurements: The primary outcome was agitation (Cohen Mansfield Agitation Inventory [CMAI]). Secondary outcomes included NPI-NH total, NPI-NH caregiver distress, cognition (sMMSE and Severe Impairment Battery [SIB] or Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale of Cognition), global impression (Clinician's Global Impression of Change [CGIC]), and adverse events.Results: Thirty-nine patients (mean ± SD age = 87 ± 10, sMMSE = 6.5 ± 6.8, CMAI = 67.9 ± 17.6, NPI-NH total = 34.3 ± 15.8, 77% male, nabilone dose = 1.6 ± 0.5 mg) were randomized. There were no crossover or treatment-order effects. Using a linear mixed model, treatment differences (95% CI) in CMAI (b = -4.0 [-6.5 to -1.5], t(30.2) = -3.3, p = 0.003), NPI-NH total (b = -4.6 [-7.5 to -1.6], t(32.9) = -3.1, p = 0.004), NPI-NH caregiver distress (b = -1.7 [-3.4 to -0.07, t(33.7) = -2.1, p = 0.041), and sMMSE (b = 1.1 [0.1-2.0], t(22.6) = 2.4, p = 0.026) all favored nabilone. However, in those who completed the SIB (n = 25) treatment differences favored placebo (b = -4.6 [-7.3 to -1.8], t(20.7) = -4.8, p = 0.003). CGIC improvement during nabilone (47%) and placebo (23%) was not significantly different (McNemar's test, exact p = 0.09). There was more sedation during nabilone (45%) compared to placebo (16%) phases (McNemar's test, exact p = 0.02), but treatment-limiting sedation was not significantly different (McNemar's test, exact p = 0.22).Conclusions: Nabilone may be an effective treatment for agitation. However, sedation and cognition should be closely monitored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Apathy and depression have each been associated with an increased risk of conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer disease (AD).These symptoms often co-occur and the contribution of each to risk of AD is not clear.Methods: National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center participants diagnosed with MCI at baseline and followed until development of AD or loss to follow-up (n = 4,932) were included. The risks of developing AD in MCI patients with neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) (apathy only, depression only, or both) were compared to that in those without NPS in a multivariate Cox regression survival analysis adjusting for baseline cognitive impairment, years of smoking, antidepressant use, and AD medication use.Results: Thirty-seven percent (N = 1713) of MCI patients developed AD (median follow-up 23 months). MCI patients with both apathy and depression had the greatest risk (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17-1.61; p < 0.0001; Wald χ2 = 14.70; df = 1). Those with apathy only also had a greater risk (HR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.05-1.47; p = 0.01; Wald χ2 = 6.22; df = 1), but not those with depression only (HR = 1.08; 95% CI: 0.95-1.22; p=0.25; Wald χ2 = 1.30; df = 1). Post-hoc analyses suggested depression may exacerbate cognitive decline in MCI patients with apathy (odds ratio = 0.70; 95% CI 0.52-0.95; p = 0.02; Wald χ2 = 5.28; df = 1), compared to those without apathy.Conclusion: MCI patients with apathy alone or both apathy and depression are at a greater risk of developing AD compared to those with no NPS. Interventions targeting apathy and depression may reduce risk of AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Guidelines that physicians use to assess fitness to drive for dementia are limited in their currency, applicability, and rigor of development. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to determine the risk of motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) or driving impairment caused by dementia, in order to update international guidelines on driving with dementia. Seven literature databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, etc.) were searched for all research studies published after 2004 containing participants with mild, moderate, or severe dementia. From the retrieved 12,860 search results, we included nine studies in this analysis, involving 378 participants with dementia and 416 healthy controls. Two studies reported on self-/informant-reported MVC risk, one revealing a four-fold increase in MVCs per 1,000 miles driven per week in 3 years prior, and the other showing no statistically significant increase over the same time span. We found medium to large effects of dementia on driving abilities in six of the seven recent studies that examined driving impairment. We also found that persons with dementia were much more likely to fail a road test than healthy controls (RR: 10.77, 95% CI: 3.00-38.62, z = 3.65, p < 0.001), with no significant heterogeneity (χ2 = 1.50, p = 0.68, I2 = 0%) in a pooled analysis of four studies. Although the limited data regarding MVCs are equivocal, even mild stages of dementia place patients at a substantially higher risk of failing a performance-based road test and of demonstrating impaired driving abilities on the road. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article looks at the relationship between coronary artery disease (CAD) and cognitive decline in older people, discussing the authors' research on microstructural characteristics of white matter (WM) in older CAD patients in relation to their cognitive ability.

The article presents an overview of the design of the Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial (ADMET), a randomized clinical trial to assess the effectiveness and safety of the psychiatric drug methylphenidate in treating the neuropsychiatric symptom of apathy in Alzheimer disease patients. Topics include the diagnostic definition of apathy and its differentiation from depression, patient recruitment, and primary and secondary medical outcomes.