Diagnostic accuracy, effectiveness and cost for cognitive impairment and dementia screening of three short cognitive tests applicable to illiterates

BACKGROUND Illiteracy, a universal problem, limits the utilization of the most widely used short cognitive tests. Our objective was to assess and compare the effectiveness and cost for cognitive impairment (CI) and dementia (DEM) screening of three short cognitive tests applicable to illiterates. METHODS Phase III diagnostic test evaluation study was performed during one year in four Primary Care centers, prospectively including individuals with suspicion of CI or DEM. All underwent the Eurotest, Memory Alteration Test (M@T), and Phototest, applied in a balanced manner. Clinical, functional, and cognitive studies were independently performed in a blinded fashion in a Cognitive Behavioral Neurology Unit, and the gold standard diagnosis was established by consensus of expert neurologists on the basis of these results. Effectiveness of tests was assessed as the proportion of correct diagnoses (diagnostic accuracy [DA]) and the kappa index of concordance (k) with respect to gold standard diagnoses. Costs were based on public prices at the time and hospital accounts. RESULTS The study included 139 individuals: 47 with DEM, 36 with CI, and 56 without CI. No significant differences in effectiveness were found among the tests. For DEM screening: Eurotest (k = 0.71 [0.59-0.83], DA = 0.87 [0.80-0.92]), M@T (k = 0.72 [0.60-0.84], DA = 0.87 [0.80-0.92]), Phototest (k = 0.70 [0.57-0.82], DA = 0.86 [0.79-0.91]). For CI screening: Eurotest (k = 0.67 [0.55-0.79]; DA = 0.83 [0.76-0.89]), M@T (k = 0.52 [0.37-0.67]; DA = 0.80 [0.72-0.86]), Phototest (k = 0.59 [0.46-0.72]; DA = 0.79 [0.71-0.86]). There were no differences in the cost of DEM screening, but the cost of CI screening was significantly higher with M@T (330.7 ± 177.1 €, mean ± sd) than with Eurotest (294.1 ± 195.0 €) or Phototest (296.0 ± 196. 5 €). Application time was shorter with Phototest (2.8 ± 0.8 min) than with Eurotest (7.1 ± 1.8 min) or M@T (6.8 ± 2.2 min). CONCLUSIONS Eurotest, M@T, and Phototest are equally effective. Eurotest and Phototest are both less expensive options but Phototest is the most efficient, requiring the shortest application time.

Combined low initial DNA damage and high radiation-induced apoptosis confers clinical resistance to long-term toxicity in breast cancer patients treated with high-dose radiotherapy

BACKGROUND. Either higher levels of initial DNA damage or lower levels of radiation-induced apoptosis in peripheral blood lymphocytes have been associated to increased risk for develop late radiation-induced toxicity. It has been recently published that these two predictive tests are inversely related. The aim of the present study was to investigate the combined role of both tests in relation to clinical radiation-induced toxicity in a set of breast cancer patients treated with high dose hyperfractionated radical radiotherapy. METHODS. Peripheral blood lymphocytes were taken from 26 consecutive patients with locally advanced breast carcinoma treated with high-dose hyperfractioned radical radiotherapy. Acute and late cutaneous and subcutaneous toxicity was evaluated using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group morbidity scoring schema. The mean follow-up of survivors (n = 13) was 197.23 months. Radiosensitivity of lymphocytes was quantified as the initial number of DNA double-strand breaks induced per Gy and per DNA unit (200 Mbp). Radiation-induced apoptosis (RIA) at 1, 2 and 8 Gy was measured by flow cytometry using annexin V/propidium iodide. RESULTS. Mean DSB/Gy/DNA unit obtained was 1.70 ± 0.83 (range 0.63-4.08; median, 1.46). Radiation-induced apoptosis increased with radiation dose (median 12.36, 17.79 and 24.83 for 1, 2, and 8 Gy respectively). We observed that those "expected resistant patients" (DSB values lower than 1.78 DSB/Gy per 200 Mbp and RIA values over 9.58, 14.40 or 24.83 for 1, 2 and 8 Gy respectively) were at low risk of suffer severe subcutaneous late toxicity (HR 0.223, 95%CI 0.073-0.678, P = 0.008; HR 0.206, 95%CI 0.063-0.677, P = 0.009; HR 0.239, 95%CI 0.062-0.929, P = 0.039, for RIA at 1, 2 and 8 Gy respectively) in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS. A radiation-resistant profile is proposed, where those patients who presented lower levels of initial DNA damage and higher levels of radiation induced apoptosis were at low risk of suffer severe subcutaneous late toxicity after clinical treatment at high radiation doses in our series. However, due to the small sample size, other prospective studies with higher number of patients are needed to validate these results.