Search

Background: Neuropsychological testing has long been embedded in daily clinical practice at memory clinics but the added value of a complete neuropsychological assessment (NPA) to standard clinical evaluation is unknown.Objective: To evaluate the added diagnostic and prognostic value of NPA to clinical evaluation only in memory clinic patients.Methods: In 221 memory clinic patients of a prospective cohort study, clinical experts diagnosed clinical syndrome (subjective cognitive impairment (SCI), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or dementia) and etiology (Alzheimer's disease (AD) or no AD), and provided a prognosis of disease course (decline or no decline) before and after results of NPA were made available. The reference standard was a panel consensus based on all clinical information at baseline and up to 2 follow-up assessments.Results: With NPA data available, clinicians changed their initial syndromal diagnosis in 22% of patients, and the etiological diagnosis as well as the prognosis in 15%. This led to an increase in correctly classified cases of 18% for syndromal diagnosis, 5% for etiological diagnosis, and 1% for prognosis. NPA data resulted in the largest improvement in patients initially classified as SCI (syndrome: 93.3% (n = 14) correctly reclassified, etiology: net reclassification improvement [NRI] = 0.61, prognosis: NRI = 0.13) or MCI (syndrome: 89.3% (n = 23) correctly reclassified, etiology: NRI = 0.17, prognosis: NRI = 0.14), while there was no improvement in patients with dementia (syndrome: 100% (n = 1) correctly reclassified, etiology: NRI = -0.05, prognosis: NRI = -0.06). Overall, inclusion of NPA in the diagnostic process increased confidence in all diagnoses with 6-7%.Conclusion: Administration of a complete NPA after standard clinical evaluation has added value for diagnosing cognitive syndrome and its underlying etiology in patients regarded as non-demented based on the first clinical impression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Limited information is available on short-term prognosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in addition to routine diagnostic workup.Objective: This study aims to investigate the added prognostic value of AD CSF biomarkers.Methods: In a prospective cohort study, clinical experts predicted cognitive and functional symptoms in 114 memory clinic patients by assessing comprehensive routine diagnostic test information (patient history, and physical, neurological, psychiatric, neuropsychological, and MRI examinations), without and with CSF biomarkers. The reference standard was the 'observed clinically relevant decline' using baseline and 1- and 2-year follow-up information.Results: Decline over a 2-year period was observed in 51% of all participants (3% in SMC, 48% in MCI, 90% in mild dementia). In the total sample, the accuracy of predicted decline did not differ significantly between routine assessment without (79% correctly predicted) and with (74% correctly predicted) CSF biomarkers. Subgroup analyses revealed 25 (83%) correct predictions in SMC, 30 (68%) in MCI, and 35 (88%) in dementia without the use of CSF; and 21 (70%), 27 (61%), and 36 (90%), respectively, with the use of CSF in addition to the routine assessment.Conclusion: AD CSF biomarkers did not increase accuracy of 2-year prognosis of cognitive and functional decline when added to routine diagnostic workup. This suggests that the standard diagnostic workup without CSF biomarkers allows fairly accurate predictions for the short-term course of symptoms. Routine AD biomarkers in CSF have limited prognostic value over 2 years in persons with a suspected cognitive disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction The study aimed to determine the room for improvement of a perfect cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker and the societal incremental net monetary benefit of CSF in subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) assuming a hypothetical disease-modifying Alzheimer's disease (AD) treatment. Methods A decision model compared current practice to a perfect biomarker and to two strategies positioning CSF as add-on test when current practice concluded the presence or absence of AD. Results The simulated MCI population was aged on average 68.3 and 49% had AD. The room for improvement by the perfect CSF test was 0.39 quality adjusted life years, €33,622 ($43,372) savings, 2.0 potential beneficial treatment years, and 1.3-year delay in dementia conversion. Discussion The results indicated more potential benefit from a biomarker positioned to verify subjects who are not expected to have AD (i.e., to prevent undertreatment) rather than to verify subjects expected to have AD (prevent overtreatment). Sensitivity analyses explored different CSF positions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In the absence of a gold standard, a panel of experts can be invited to assign a reference diagnosis for use in research. Available literature offers limited guidance on assembling and working with an expert panel for this purpose. We aimed to develop a protocol for an expert panel consensus diagnosis and evaluated its applicability in a pilot project. Methods An adjusted Delphi method was used, which started with the assessment of clinical vignettes by 3 experts individually, followed by a consensus discussion meeting to solve diagnostic discrepancies. A panel facilitator ensured that all experts were able to express their views, and encouraged the use of argumentation to arrive at a specific diagnosis, until consensus was reached by all experts. Eleven vignettes of patients suspected of having a primary neurodegenerative disease were presented to the experts. Clinical information was provided stepwise and included medical history, neurological, physical and cognitive function, brain MRI scan, and follow-up assessments over 2 years. After the consensus discussion meeting, the procedure was evaluated by the experts. Results The average degree of consensus for the reference diagnosis increased from 52% after individual assessment of the vignettes to 94% after the consensus discussion meeting. Average confidence in the diagnosis after individual assessment was 85%. This did not increase after the consensus discussion meeting. The process evaluation led to several recommendations for improvement of the protocol. Conclusion A protocol for attaining a reference diagnosis based on expert panel consensus was shown feasible in research practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The objective of this study is to systematically review the literature on economic evaluations of interventions for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related disorders and to describe their general and methodological characteristics. We focused on the diagnostic aspects of the decision models to assess the applicability of existing decision models for the evaluation of the recently revised diagnostic research criteria for AD. Methods: PubMed and the National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation database were searched for English-language publications related to economic evaluations on diagnostic technologies. Trial-based economic evaluations were assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list. Modeling studies were assessed using the framework for quality assessment of decision-analytic models. Results: The search retrieved 2109 items, from which eight decision-analytic modeling studies and one trial-based economic evaluation met all eligibility criteria. Conclusions: Diversity among the study objective and characteristics was considerable and, despite considerable methodological quality, several flaws were indicated. Recommendations were focused on diagnostic aspects and the applicability of existing models for the evaluation of recently revised diagnostic research criteria for AD. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: [11C]Pittsburgh compound B ([11C]PIB) and [18F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) PET measure fibrillar amyloid-β load and glucose metabolism, respectively. We evaluated the impact of these tracers on the diagnostic process in a memory clinic population. Methods: One hundred fifty-four patients underwent paired dynamic [11C]PIB and static [18F]FDG PET scans shortly after completing a standard dementia screening. Two-year clinical follow-up data were available for 39 patients. Parametric PET images were assessed visually and results were reported to the neurologists responsible for the initial diagnosis. Outcome measures were (change in) clinical diagnosis and confidence in that diagnosis before and after disclosing PET results. Results: [11C]PIB scans were positive in 40 of 66 (61%) patients with a clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), 5 of 18 (28%) patients with frontotemporal dementia (FTD), 4 of 5 (80%) patients with Lewy body dementia, and 3 of 10 (30%) patients with other dementias. [18F]FDG uptake patterns matched the clinical diagnosis in 38 of 66 (58%) of AD patients, and in 6 of 18 (33%) FTD patients. PET results led to a change in diagnosis in 35 (23%) patients. This only occurred when prior diagnostic certainty was <90%. Diagnostic confidence increased from 71 ± 17% before to 87 ± 16% after PET (p < .001). Two-year clinical follow-up (n = 39) showed that [11C]PIB and [18F]FDG predicted progression to AD for patients with mild cognitive impairment, and that the diagnosis of dementia established after PET remained unchanged in 96% of patients. Conclusions: In a memory clinic setting, combined [11C]PIB and [18F]FDG PET are of additional value on top of the standard diagnostic work-up, especially when prior diagnostic confidence is low. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: New research criteria for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) have recently been developed to enable an early diagnosis of AD pathophysiology by relying on emerging biomarkers. To enable efficient allocation of health care resources, evidence is needed to support decision makers on the adoption of emerging biomarkers in clinical practice. The research goals are to 1) assess the diagnostic test accuracy of current clinical diagnostic work-up and emerging biomarkers in MRI, PET and CSF, 2) perform a cost-consequence analysis and 3) assess long-term cost-effectiveness by an economic model. Methods/design: In a cohort design 241 consecutive patients suspected of having a primary neurodegenerative disease are approached in four academic memory clinics and followed for two years. Clinical data and data on quality of life, costs and emerging biomarkers are gathered. Diagnostic test accuracy is determined by relating the clinical practice and new research criteria diagnoses to a reference diagnosis. The clinical practice diagnosis at baseline is reflected by a consensus procedure among experts using clinical information only (no biomarkers). The diagnosis based on the new research criteria is reflected by decision rules that combine clinical and biomarker information. The reference diagnosis is determined by a consensus procedure among experts based on clinical information on the course of symptoms over a two-year time period. A decision analytic model is built combining available evidence from different resources among which (accuracy) results from the study, literature and expert opinion to assess long-term cost-effectiveness of the emerging biomarkers. Discussion: Several other multi-centre trials study the relative value of new biomarkers for early evaluation of AD and related disorders. The uniqueness of this study is the assessment of resource utilization and quality of life to enable an economic evaluation. The study results are generalizable to a population of patients who are referred to a memory clinic due to their memory problems. Trial registration: NCT01450891 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]