Predicting conversion to dementia in a memory clinic: A standard clinical approach compared with an empirically defined clustering method (latent profile analysis) for mild cognitive impairment subtyping

Introduction
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has clinical value in its ability to predict later dementia. A better understanding of cognitive profiles can further help delineate who is most at risk of conversion to dementia. We aimed to (1) examine to what extent the usual MCI subtyping using core criteria corresponds to empirically defined clusters of patients (latent profile analysis [LPA] of continuous neuropsychological data) and (2) compare the two methods of subtyping memory clinic participants in their prediction of conversion to dementia.

Methods
Memory clinic participants (MCI, n = 139) and age-matched controls (n = 98) were recruited. Participants had a full cognitive assessment, and results were grouped (1) according to traditional MCI subtypes and (2) using LPA. MCI participants were followed over approximately 2 years after their initial assessment to monitor for conversion to dementia.

Results
Groups were well matched for age and education. Controls performed significantly better than MCI participants on all cognitive measures. With the traditional analysis, most MCI participants were in the amnestic multidomain subgroup (46.8%) and this group was most at risk of conversion to dementia (63%). From the LPA, a three-profile solution fit the data best. Profile 3 was the largest group (40.3%), the most cognitively impaired, and most at risk of conversion to dementia (68% of the group).

Discussion
LPA provides a useful adjunct in delineating MCI participants most at risk of conversion to dementia and adds confidence to standard categories of clinical inference.

The effects of blood pressure lowering on development of cognitive impairment and dementia in patients without apparent prior cerebrovascular disease

BACKGROUND: Hypertension and cognitive impairment are prevalent in older people. It is known that hypertension is a direct risk factor for vascular dementia and recent studies have suggested hypertension also impacts upon prevalence of Alzheimer's disease. The question is therefore whether treatment of hypertension lowers the rate of cognitive decline. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of blood pressure lowering treatments for the prevention of dementia and cognitive decline in patients with hypertension but no history of cerebrovascular disease. SEARCH STRATEGY: The trials were identified through a search of CDCIG's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL on 27 April 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trials in which pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions to lower blood pressure were given for at least six months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. The following outcomes were assessed: incidence of dementia, cognitive change from baseline, blood pressure level, incidence and severity of side effects and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials including 12,091 hypertensive subjects were identified. Average age was 72.8 years. Participants were recruited from industrialised countries. Mean blood pressure at entry across the studies was 170/84 mmHg. All trials instituted a stepped care approach to hypertension treatment, starting with a calcium-channel blocker, a diuretic or an angiotensin receptor blocker. The combined result of the three trials reporting incidence of dementia indicated no significant difference between treatment and placebo (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% CI 0.69, 1.16). Blood pressure reduction resulted in a 11% relative risk reduction of dementia in patients with no prior cerebrovascular disease but this effect was not statistically significant (p = 0.38) and there was considerable heterogeneity between the trials. The combined results from the two trials reporting change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) did not indicate a benefit from treatment (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) = 0.10, 95% CI -0.03, 0.23). Both systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were reduced significantly in the two trials assessing this outcome (WMD = -7.53, 95% CI -8.28, -6.77 for systolic blood pressure, WMD = -3.87, 95% CI -4.25, -3.50 for diastolic blood pressure).Two trials reported adverse effects requiring discontinuation of treatment and the combined results indicated a significant benefit from placebo (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.06, 1.30). When analysed separately, however, more patients on placebo in SCOPE were likely to discontinue treatment due to side effects; the converse was true in SHEP 1991. Quality of life data could not be analysed in the three studies. There was difficulty with the control group in this review as many of the control subjects received antihypertensive treatment because their blood pressures exceeded pre-set values. In most cases the study became a comparison between the study drug against a usual antihypertensive regimen. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no convincing evidence from the trials identified that blood pressure lowering prevents the development of dementia or cognitive impairment in hypertensive patients with no apparent prior cerebrovascular disease. There were significant problems identified with analysing the data, however, due to the number of patients lost to follow-up and the number of placebo patients given active treatment. This introduced bias. More robust results may be obtained by analysing one year data to reduce differential drop-out or by conducting a meta-analysis using individual patient data.

Blood pressure lowering in patients without prior cerebrovascular disease for prevention of cognitive impairment and dementia

Background: This is an update of a previous review (McGuinness 2006). Hypertension and cognitive impairment are prevalent in older people. Hypertension is a direct risk factor for vascular dementia (VaD) and recent studies have suggested hypertension impacts upon prevalence of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Therefore does treatment of hypertension prevent cognitive decline?
Objectives: To assess the effects of blood pressure lowering treatments for the prevention of dementia and cognitive decline in patients with hypertension but no history of cerebrovascular disease.
Search strategy: The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS as well as many trials databases and grey literature sources were searched on 13 February 2008 using the terms: hypertens$ OR anti-hypertens$. Selection criteria: Randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trials in which pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions to lower blood pressure were given for at least six months.
Data collection and analysis: Two independent reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. The following outcomes were assessed: incidence of dementia, cognitive change from baseline, blood pressure level, incidence and severity of side effects and quality of life.
Main results: Four trials including 15,936 hypertensive subjects were identified. Average age was 75.4 years. Mean blood pressure at entry across the studies was 171/86 mmHg. The combined result of the four trials reporting incidence of dementia indicated no significant difference between treatment and placebo (236/7767 versus 259/7660, Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% CI 0.74, 1.07) and there was considerable heterogeneity between the trials. The combined results from the three trials reporting change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) did not indicate a benefit from treatment (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) = 0.42, 95%CI 0.30, 0.53). Both systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were reduced significantly in the three trials assessing this outcome (WMD = -10.22, 95% CI -10.78, -9.66 for systolic blood pressure, WMD = -4.28, 95% CI -4.58, -3.98 for diastolic blood pressure). Three trials reported adverse effects requiring discontinuation of treatment and the combined results indicated no significant difference (OR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.92, 1.11). When analysed separately, however, more patients on placebo in Syst Eur 1997 were likely to discontinue treatment due to side effects; the converse was true in SHEP 1991. Quality of life data could not be analysed in the four studies. Analysis of the included studies in this review was problematic as many of the control subjects received antihypertensive treatment because their blood pressures exceeded pre-set values. In most cases the study became a comparison between the study drug against a usual antihypertensive regimen.
Authors' conclusions: There is no convincing evidence fromthe trials identified that blood pressure lowering in late-life prevents the development of dementia or cognitive impairment in hypertensive patients with no apparent prior cerebrovascular disease. There were significant problems identified with analysing the data, however, due to the number of patients lost to follow-up and the number of placebo patients who received active treatment. This introduced bias. More robust results may be obtained by conducting a meta-analysis using individual patient data.

The relationship between specific cognitive impairment and behaviour in Prader-Willi syndrome

Background

Individuals with Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) have been shown to demonstrate a particular cognitive deficit in attention switching and high levels of preference for routine and temper outbursts. This study assesses whether a specific pathway between a cognitive deficit and behaviour via environmental interaction can exist in individuals with PWS.

Methods

Four individuals with PWS participated in a series of three single-case experiments including laboratory-based and natural environment designs. Cognitive (computer-based) challenges placed varying demands on attention switching or controlled for the cognitive demands of the tasks while placing no demands on switching. Unexpected changes to routines or expectations were presented in controlled games, or imposed on participants' natural environments and compared with control conditions during which no unexpected changes occurred. Behaviour was observed and heart rate was measured.

Results

Participants showed significantly increased temper outburst related behaviours during cognitive challenges that placed demands on attention switching, relative to the control cognitive challenges. Participants showed significantly increased temper outburst related behaviours when unexpected changes occurred in an experimental or the natural environment compared with when no changes occurred.

Conclusions

Difficult behaviours that could be triggered reliably in an individual by a specific cognitive demand could also be triggered via manipulation of the environment. Results suggest that a directional relationship between a specific cognitive deficit and behaviour, via environmental interaction, can exist in individuals with PWS.

Non-pharmacological interventions for cognitive impairment due to systemic cancer treatment

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows:

The primary objective of this review is to evaluate the effects of non-pharmacological interventions among cancer patients targeted at maintaining cognitive function or ameliorating cognitive impairment as a result of cancer or receipt of systemic cancer treatment (i.e. chemotherapy or hormonal therapies in isolation or combination with other treatments). Patients who have received treatments such as cranial radiation for central nervous system tumours or metastases are not the focus of this review and will be excluded.

A second objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for improving non-cognitive outcomes e.g. quality of life among this population.

Thirdly, we will extract and analyse data regarding the duration of intervention effects.

Fourthly, we will examine each study to identify safety as an outcome and incorporate information on intervention safety where possible. Evidence for the review will be based on data from randomised trials.

A Validation Study of Vascular Cognitive Impairment Genetics Meta-Analysis Findings in an Independent Collaborative Cohort

Vascular cognitive impairment (VCI), including its severe form, vascular dementia (VaD), is the second most common form of dementia. The genetic etiology of sporadic VCI remains largely unknown. We previously conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published genetic association studies of sporadic VCI prior to 6 July 2012, which demonstrated that APOE (ɛ4, ɛ2) and MTHFR (rs1801133) variants were associated with susceptibility for VCI. De novo genotyping was conducted in a new independent relatively large collaborative European cohort of VaD (nmax = 549) and elderly non-demented samples (nmax = 552). Where available, genotype data derived from Illumina's 610-quad array for 1210 GERAD1 control samples were also included in analyses of genes examined. Associations were tested using the Cochran-Armitage trend test: MTHFR rs1801133 (OR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.16-1.58, p = <0.0001), APOE rs7412 (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.90, p = 0.01), and APOE rs429358 (OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.17-2.16, p = 0.003). Association was also observed with APOE epsilon alleles; ɛ4 (OR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.35-2.52, p = <0.0001) and ɛ2 (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.98, p = 0.03). Logistic Regression and Bonferroni correction in a subgroup of the cohort adjusted for gender, age, and population maintained the association of APOE rs429358 and ɛ4 allele.

Non-pharmacological interventions for cognitive impairment due to systemic cancer treatment (Review)

Background

It is estimated that up to 75% of cancer survivors may experience cognitive impairment as a result of cancer treatment and given the increasing size of the cancer survivor population, the number of affected people is set to rise considerably in coming years. There is a need, therefore, to identify effective, non-pharmacological interventions for maintaining cognitive function or ameliorating cognitive impairment among people with a previous cancer diagnosis.
Objectives

To evaluate the cognitive effects, non-cognitive effects, duration and safety of non-pharmacological interventions among cancer patients targeted at maintaining cognitive function or ameliorating cognitive impairment as a result of cancer or receipt of systemic cancer treatment (i.e. chemotherapy or hormonal therapies in isolation or combination with other treatments).
Search methods

We searched the Cochrane Centre Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PUBMED, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and PsycINFO databases. We also searched registries of ongoing trials and grey literature including theses, dissertations and conference proceedings. Searches were conducted for articles published from 1980 to 29 September 2015.
Selection criteria

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of non-pharmacological interventions to improve cognitive impairment or to maintain cognitive functioning among survivors of adult-onset cancers who have completed systemic cancer therapy (in isolation or combination with other treatments) were eligible. Studies among individuals continuing to receive hormonal therapy were included. We excluded interventions targeted at cancer survivors with central nervous system (CNS) tumours or metastases, non-melanoma skin cancer or those who had received cranial radiation or, were from nursing or care home settings. Language restrictions were not applied.
Data collection and analysis

Author pairs independently screened, selected, extracted data and rated the risk of bias of studies. We were unable to conduct planned meta-analyses due to heterogeneity in the type of interventions and outcomes, with the exception of compensatory strategy training interventions for which we pooled data for mental and physical well-being outcomes. We report a narrative synthesis of intervention effectiveness for other outcomes.
Main results

Five RCTs describing six interventions (comprising a total of 235 participants) met the eligibility criteria for the review. Two trials of computer-assisted cognitive training interventions (n = 100), two of compensatory strategy training interventions (n = 95), one of meditation (n = 47) and one of physical activity intervention (n = 19) were identified. Each study focused on breast cancer survivors. All five studies were rated as having a high risk of bias. Data for our primary outcome of interest, cognitive function were not amenable to being pooled statistically. Cognitive training demonstrated beneficial effects on objectively assessed cognitive function (including processing speed, executive functions, cognitive flexibility, language, delayed- and immediate- memory), subjectively reported cognitive function and mental well-being. Compensatory strategy training demonstrated improvements on objectively assessed delayed-, immediate- and verbal-memory, self-reported cognitive function and spiritual quality of life (QoL). The meta-analyses of two RCTs (95 participants) did not show a beneficial effect from compensatory strategy training on physical well-being immediately (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.59 to 0.83; I2= 67%) or two months post-intervention (SMD - 0.21, 95% CI -0.89 to 0.47; I2 = 63%) or on mental well-being two months post-intervention (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -1.10 to 0.34; I2 = 67%). Lower mental well-being immediately post-intervention appeared to be observed in patients who received compensatory strategy training compared to wait-list controls (SMD -0.57, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.16; I2 = 0%). We assessed the assembled studies using GRADE for physical and mental health outcomes and this evidence was rated to be low quality and, therefore findings should be interpreted with caution. Evidence for physical activity and meditation interventions on cognitive outcomes is unclear.
Authors' conclusions

Overall, the, albeit low-quality evidence may be interpreted to suggest that non-pharmacological interventions may have the potential to reduce the risk of, or ameliorate, cognitive impairment following systemic cancer treatment. Larger, multi-site studies including an appropriate, active attentional control group, as well as consideration of functional outcomes (e.g. activities of daily living) are required in order to come to firmer conclusions about the benefits or otherwise of this intervention approach. There is also a need to conduct research into cognitive impairment among cancer patient groups other than women with breast cancer.