Acute Treatment Patterns, Migraine Burden, and Healthcare Resource Use in People With Migraine: Results From the OVERCOME (EU) Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: The ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment and Care Of MigrainE (OVERCOME) European Union (EU) is part of an overarching population-based study program that also includes the United States and Japan. Here, we report data on the migraine/severe headache burden and the use of acute medication and healthcare resources in Spain and Germany. METHODS: OVERCOME (EU) was an online, non-interventional, cross-sectional survey conducted in adults in Spain and Germany between October 2020 and February 2021. A total migraine cohort was established based on health survey participants who reported headache/migraine in the last 12 months AND identified as having migraine based on modified International Classification of Headache Disorders, third edition criteria OR self-reported physician diagnosis. Data were analyzed for the total migraine cohort and the subcohort with moderate to severe headache attacks, with average pain severity ≥ 5 points, pain duration ≥ 4 h, and at least moderate disability due to migraine [Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score ≥ 11] over the past 3 months. RESULTS: Pain of moderate or severe intensity was the most frequent symptom in the total migraine cohort (n = 19,103/20,756; 92.0%). Proportions of participants reporting severe disability (MIDAS Grade IV), poorer quality of life (QoL; Migraine-Specific QoL Questionnaire), and higher interictal burden (Migraine Interictal Burden Scale-4), generally increased with number of headache days (HDs)/month. Most participants (92.5%) reported current acute migraine/severe headache medication use, although only 39.0% were using triptans. In the moderate to severe attacks subcohort (n = 5547), 48.4% were using triptans, with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs the most common acute medication. The moderate to severe attacks subcohort also reported poorer QoL and greater pain and disability with increasing HDs/month, although severe interictal burden was reported for ~ 60% of participants regardless of HDs/month. Treatment satisfaction (six-item migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire) in those using triptans was generally poor in both total and subcohorts. CONCLUSION: High migraine-related burden levels were reported, despite use of acute medication. Although triptans are recommended for moderate to severe migraine attacks in Spanish and German guidelines, less than half of participants were using triptans; treatment satisfaction in those using triptans was generally poor. New tailored treatment options may help address unmet needs in current acute treatment.

Galcanezumab in the Treatment of Migraine: A Narrative Review of Real-World Studies.

OBJECTIVES: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have established the efficacy of galcanezumab, an antibody binding calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) ligand, in the preventive treatment of migraine. The objective was to summarize real-world data evaluating galcanezumab in the preventive treatment of migraine, to complement RCT results with evidence observed in clinical practice. METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify real-world studies evaluating galcanezumab in the treatment for patients with migraine. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were identified; some only evaluated galcanezumab, and others used pooled data from multiple anti-CGRP antibodies. The studies recruited diverse patient populations, including patients who had failed multiple prior preventive therapies. Treatment was associated with significant reductions from baseline in monthly migraine days and monthly headache days by 4.3 to 12.9 and 3.1 to 13.9, respectively. These values were numerically greater than those reported in most galcanezumab RCTs. Significant decreases from baseline were evident within the first month of treatment, and efficacy was maintained throughout the follow-up periods, ranging from 3 to 12 months. Galcanezumab was also associated with improvements in other efficacy end points, including decreased headache pain intensity, reduction in analgesic use, and improvements in daily functioning and quality of life. Functionality scores, as assessed by the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale questionnaire, decreased by 27 to 75 points from baseline at 3 to 12 months. Galcanezumab was associated with a low discontinuation rate and higher rates of persistence compared with standard migraine preventive treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide complementary data that galcanezumab is effective across the diverse patient populations observed in routine clinical practice.

Treatment pattern and health care resource utilization for Taiwanese patients with migraine: a population-based study.

Objectives: Given the substantial disease burden, appropriate and effective management of migraine is a public health priority. To gain insights into real-world migraine management practices in Taiwan, current treatment patterns, costs, and health care resource use were assessed. Methods: This was a retrospective, longitudinal study using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Included patients had an initial diagnosis of migraine (defined using International Classification of Diseases codes) between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2017. Data analyzed included demographics; the use, number, and type of acute and preventive medications; and drug and medical services costs. Data were stratified according to migraine type (chronic [CM] or episodic [EM] migraine). Results: A total of 312,718 patients were included in the analyses: 53,992 (17.3%) had CM and 258,726 (82.7%) had EM. Most patients (81.7%) had used acute and/or preventive medications; acute medications used more frequently than preventive medications (78.0% vs. 20.2%). Acute medications were used by 81.6 and 77.3% of patients with CM and EM, respectively. Commonly used acute medications were acetaminophen (68.8%), ergots (49.4%), and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (38.4%); the use of triptans (6.0%), tramadol (3.1%), and other opioids (0.2%) was less common. A total of 28.6 and 18.5% of patients with CM and EM, respectively, used preventive medications. Flunarizine (68.9%), propranolol (40.7%), and topiramate (16.0%) were the most commonly used preventive medications. Most patients had used 1-2 acute or preventive medications, with the use of ≥3 acute or preventive medications more common in patients with CM than EM. Average total medical cost per annum was 4,169 New Taiwan Dollars (NTDs) per CM patient and 2,928 NTDs per EM patient, with CM patients having higher costs associated with medical service utilization and acute medication use. Conclusion: These real-world data suggest unmet needs for Taiwanese patients with migraine, including under-utilization of preventive medications and greater costs and health care resource use for patients with CM versus EM. These findings provide important information on treatment patterns, cost, and health care resource use for patients with migraine in Taiwan.

Efficacy and Safety of Galcanezumab as a Preventive Treatment for Episodic Migraine in South Korean Patients: A Post-Hoc Analysis of a Phase 3 Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The estimated prevalence of migraines in South Korea is 6.0%, with affected patients having unmet needs. The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, for episodic migraine (EM) prevention was evaluated in South Korean patients. METHODS: During the double-blind period of the EVOLVE-2 phase 3 trial, patients with EM were randomized into placebo, 120 mg-galcanezumab, and 240-mg galcanezumab treatment groups. The primary endpoint was the overall mean change from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days during the 6-month double-blind period. We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the South Korean cohort in EVOLVE-2. RESULTS: Among 98 South Korean patients in the intent-to-treat population, significant changes from baseline were observed in the number of monthly migraine headache days in the 240-mg galcanezumab group compared with the placebo group (-2.64, p=0.013), in the percentage of patients with ≥50% reduction in the number of monthly migraine headache days (120 mg: odds ratio=2.43, p=0.030; 240 mg: odds ratio=2.60, p=0.019), in the number of monthly migraine headache days with acute medication use (120 mg: -2.22, p=0.006; 240 mg: -2.23, p=0.005), and in the Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Role Function-Restrictive (120 mg: 8.34, p=0.040). Numerical improvements from baseline were observed relative to the placebo group in at least one galcanezumab group for: the percentage of patients with ≥75% reduction in the number of monthly migraine headache days functional impairment, and disease severity. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event in the combined galcanezumab group was injection site reaction, which led to treatment discontinuation for one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab treatment demonstrated efficacy and a favorable safety and tolerability profile in South Korean patients with EM.

Preventive treatment patterns and treatment satisfaction in migraine: results of the OVERCOME (EU) study.

BACKGROUND: Insights into the burden, needs and treatment of migraine from internet-based surveys in diverse real-world migraine populations are needed, especially at a time when novel preventive migraine medications are becoming part of the therapeutic armamentarium. The objectives of this analysis are to describe traditional preventive (orals and onabotulinum toxin A) treatment patterns in the OVERCOME (EU) study migraine cohort, as well as treatment patterns and patient satisfaction with current treatment in a subgroup of respondents eligible for migraine preventive medication. METHODS: The cross-sectional non-interventional OVERCOME (EU) study was conducted (October 2020-February 2021) via an online survey among adults (aged ≥ 18 years) resident in Germany or Spain. Participants, registered in existing online panels, who were willing to provide consent were considered. The migraine cohort included participants reporting headache/migraine in the past year, identified based on a validated migraine diagnostic questionnaire and/or self-reported physician diagnosis. A subgroup of survey respondents defined as eligible for migraine preventive medication at the point in time the cross-sectional survey was taken was also analysed. Variables assessed included sociodemographic and migraine-related clinical characteristics, preventive (traditional and calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies) treatment patterns and patient satisfaction with current treatment. Results are descriptive only. RESULTS: Of the 20,756 participants in the migraine cohort, 78.5% sought professional medical care, 50.8% received a migraine diagnosis and only 17.7% had ever used preventive medication. Half (53.3%) of participants currently using preventives took their most recent medication for six months or less. Most patients (73.9%) classified as eligible for preventive medication (based on headache frequency and/or at least moderate disability due to migraine) reported not using traditional preventives and many of those who did (66.8%) were not satisfied with their current standard of care. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the low proportion of people diagnosed with migraine despite a higher rate of consultation and suggest the need for better access to treatment for people with migraine and new preventive therapies with improved efficacy and safety profiles to improve adherence and patient satisfaction.

Prevalence Rates of Primary Headache Disorders and Evaluation and Treatment Patterns Among Korean Neurologists.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Several studies have found that the prevalence of migraine is higher among healthcare professionals than in the general population. Furthermore, several investigations have suggested that the personal experiences of neurologists with migraine can influence their perception and treatment of the disease. This study assessed these relationships in Korea. METHODS: A survey was used to investigate the following characteristics among neurologists: 1) the prevalence rates of migraine, primary stabbing headache, and cluster headache, and 2) their perceptions of migraine and the pain severity experienced by patients, diagnosing migraine, evaluation and treatment patterns, and satisfaction and difficulties with treatment. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 442 actively practicing board-certified Korean neurologists. The self-reported lifetime prevalence rates of migraine, migraine with aura, primary stabbing headache, and cluster headache were 49.8%, 12.7%, 26.7%, and 1.4%, respectively. Few of the neurologists used a headache diary or validated scales with their patients, and approximately half were satisfied with the effectiveness of preventive medications. Significant differences were observed between neurologists who had and had not experienced migraine, regarding certain perceptions of migraine, but no differences were found between these groups in the evaluation and preventive treatment of migraine. CONCLUSIONS: The high self-reported lifetime prevalence rates of migraine and other primary headache disorders among Korean neurologists may indicate that these rates are underreported in the general population, although potential population biases must be considered. From the perspective of neurologists, there is an unmet need for the proper application of headache diaries, validated scales, and effective preventive treatments for patients. While the past experiences of neurologists with migraine might not influence how they evaluate or apply preventive treatments to migraine, they may influence certain perceptions of the disease.

Migraine-attributed burden, impact and disability, and migraine-impacted quality of life: Expert consensus on definitions from a Delphi process.

BACKGROUND: Migraine-attributed burden, impact, disability and migraine-impacted quality of life are important concepts in clinical management, clinical and epidemiological research, and health policy, requiring clear and agreed definitions. We aimed to formulate concise and precise definitions of these concepts by expert consensus. METHODS: We searched the terms migraine-attributed burden, impact, disability and migraine-impacted quality of life in Embase and Medline from 1974 and 1946 respectively. We followed a Delphi process to reach consensus on definitions. RESULTS: We found widespread conflation of concepts and inconsistent terminology within publications. Following three Delphi rounds, we defined migraine-attributed burden as "the summation of all negative consequences of the disease or its diagnosis"; migraine-attributed impact as "the effect of the disease, or its diagnosis, on a specified aspect of life, health or wellbeing"; migraine-attributed disability as "physical, cognitive and mental incapacities imposed by the disease"; and migraine-impacted quality of life as "the subjective assessment by a person with the disease of their general wellbeing, position and prospects in life". We complemented each definition with a detailed description. CONCLUSION: These definitions and descriptions should foster consistency and encourage more appropriate use of currently available quantifying instruments and aid the future development of others.

Lasmiditan efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine was independent of prior response to triptans: Findings from the CENTURION study.

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of triptan users exhibit an insufficient response or inadequate tolerability to a triptan, and some may develop a contraindication. Lasmiditan, a selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist, may be an option for these individuals. We assessed lasmiditan efficacy in a subgroup of patients in CENTURION (Phase 3 migraine consistency study) who exhibited an insufficient response to triptans, including a subgroup with insufficient response due to efficacy only. METHODS: Patients were randomized to lasmiditan 200 mg for four attacks, lasmiditan 100 mg for four attacks, or placebo for three and lasmiditan 50 mg for one attack. Triptan insufficient responders were pre-defined as patients with insufficient efficacy or tolerability, or who developed a contraindication. RESULTS: In triptan insufficient responders, lasmiditan was superior to placebo (p < 0.05) for pain freedom beginning at 1 h (both doses); pain relief beginning at 0.5 (200 mg) or 1 h (100 mg); migraine-related disability freedom, much/very much better on the Patient Global Impression of Change, and most bothersome symptom freedom at 2 h; sustained pain freedom; and need for rescue medication. Lasmiditan showed benefit for consistency of effect across attacks for 2-h pain freedom and pain relief. Findings were similar in triptan responders and triptan naïve patients and when the triptan insufficient response definition was based on efficacy only. CONCLUSIONS: Lasmiditan was efficacious across multiple clinically relevant endpoints in the acute treatment of migraine independent of prior response to triptans.Trial Registration: CENTURION (NCT03670810); SAMURAI (NCT02439320); SPARTAN (NCT02605174).

Burden of migraine and unmet needs from the patients' perspective: a survey across 11 specialized headache clinics in Korea.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a neurological, primary headache disorder affecting more than 1 billion people worldwide, with a multi-faceted burden that can significantly impact the everyday life of a patient, both during and between attacks. However, studies on patient awareness, burden, and clinical management of migraine in Korea are limited and outdated. The aim of this study was to comprehensively investigate the current difficulties and unmet needs that Korean patients with migraine encounter from their perspective. METHODS: A total of 207 patients with episodic or chronic migraine aged between 15 and 76 years, completed a survey designed to cover the following topics: diagnosis, understanding of the disease, treatment experience, disability, and quality of life. Patients were recruited by their neurologists from 11 specialized headache clinics in Korea and completed the survey between 22 July and 19 August 2019. Validated scales such as the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQv2.1) were used to assess levels of disability and quality of life, respectively, in patients. RESULTS: On average, it took 10.1 years from onset of symptoms to diagnosis and a mean of 3.9 hospitals were visited for treatment prior to the patient's current hospital. There was a lack of understanding among respondents about migraine, with 55.6% believing that unilateral headache is a unique feature of migraine compared with other headache disorders. On average, high levels of disability and poor quality of life were reported by patients, as assessed by MIDAS and MSQv2.1, respectively, but only 23.7% had regularly taken preventive medication in the past. Overall satisfaction with previous doctor-patient relationships was reported by 29.5% of respondents, and satisfaction with preventive and acute medications by only 40.8% and 27.1% of the respondents, respectively. CONCLUSION: Korean patients with migraine experience significant disability and reduced quality of life as a result of the disease and have clear unmet needs in terms of diagnosis, understanding of the disease, and disease management including treatment.

Safety and efficacy of galcanezumab in Taiwanese patients: a post-hoc analysis of phase 3 studies in episodic and chronic migraine.

OBJECTIVE: Migraine is a chronic, disabling neurological disease affecting >1 billion people worldwide. Migraine remains undertreated in Asia, including Taiwan. Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds calcitonin gene-related peptide, a peptide firmly established in the pathophysiology of migraine, with demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with episodic or chronic migraine. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in Taiwanese patients with episodic or chronic migraine. METHODS: We conducted a sub-group analysis of the Taiwanese cohort from two double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 clinical trials of galcanezumab in the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine, EVOLVE-2 (NCT02614196) and REGAIN (NCT02614261), respectively. During the EVOLVE-2 and REGAIN double-blind periods, 2092 patients were randomly assigned to receive monthly injections of either placebo, 120 mg galcanezumab (240 mg loading dose), or 240 mg galcanezumab. In REGAIN, a 9-month open-label period followed. Post-hoc analysis on the Taiwanese population across both trials included 106 patients, 45 of whom continued into the open-label period in REGAIN. RESULTS: Our findings show that galcanezumab has similar efficacy and safety in the Taiwanese population, as compared to the "All Patients" population included in the study. Galcanezumab treatment reduced the number of monthly migraine headache days, determined a higher percentage of patients with a ≥ 50% response, and positively impacted quality of life. CONCLUSION: Galcanezumab is a promising therapeutic for the preventive treatment of migraine in the Taiwanese population.

Representativeness of European clinical trial populations in mild Alzheimer's disease dementia: a comparison of 18-month outcomes with real-world data from the GERAS observational study.

BACKGROUND: Comparison of disease progression between placebo-group patients from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world patients can aid in assessing the generalisability of RCT outcomes. This analysis compared outcomes between community-dwelling patients with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia from two RCTs (pooled European (EU) data from EXPEDITION and EXPEDITION 2) and similar patients from the EU GERAS observational study. METHODS: Data from placebo-group patients with mild AD dementia from the RCTs (EU countries only) were compared with data from GERAS patients with mild AD dementia. Between-group differences for changes over 18 months were analysed for cognition, functioning, neuropsychiatric symptoms, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and caregiver time using propensity score-adjusted models. A sensitivity analysis compared EU/North American (EU/NA) EXPEDITION patients with GERAS patients. RESULTS: EU EXPEDITION patients (n = 168) were younger than GERAS patients (n = 566) (mean (standard deviation, SD) age 71.9 (7.4) versus 77.3 (6.9) years; p < 0.001) and were more likely to use AD treatment (95% versus 84%; p < 0.001). Cognitive performance was similar at baseline in both populations, although GERAS patients showed greater functional impairment (p = 0.005) and lower HRQoL (p < 0.05). At 18 months, no statistically significant differences between EXPEDITION (n = 133) and GERAS (n = 417) patients were observed for changes in cognitive, functional, neuropsychiatric and HRQoL outcomes. Least squares mean (95% confidence interval) change in caregiver time (hours/month) spent on instrumental activities of daily living (iADL; 29.22 (19.16, 39.27) versus 3.20 (-11.89, 18.28), p = 0.001) and supervision (66.59 (47.49, 85.69) versus 3.04 (-25.39, 31.48), p < 0.001) showed greater increases in GERAS than EXPEDITION. In the sensitivity analysis, changes in neuropsychiatric and HRQoL scores and caregiver time spent on basic ADL were also significantly greater in GERAS than in EU/NA EXPEDITION patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with mild AD dementia participating in the EU EXPEDITION RCTs and the GERAS observational study showed a similar decline in cognitive, functional and neuropsychiatric symptoms over 18 months, whereas changes in caregiver time measures were significantly greater in GERAS. Results indicate the importance of using similar regions when comparing real-world and RCT data. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00905372 EXPEDITION. Registered 18 May 2009. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00904683 EXPEDITION 2. Registered 18 May 2009.

Reliability of coded data to identify earliest indications of cognitive decline, cognitive evaluation and Alzheimer's disease diagnosis: a pilot study in England.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the reliability of using diagnosis codes and prescription data to identify the timing of symptomatic onset, cognitive assessment and diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) among patients diagnosed with AD. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). The study cohort consisted of a random sample of 50 patients with first AD diagnosis in 2010-2013. Additionally, patients were required to have a valid text-field code and a hospital episode or a referral in the 3 years before the first AD diagnosis. The earliest indications of cognitive impairment, cognitive assessment and AD diagnosis were identified using two approaches: (1) using an algorithm based on diagnostic codes and prescription drug information and (2) using information compiled from manual review of both text-based and coded data. The reliability of the code-based algorithm for identifying the earliest dates of the three measures described earlier was evaluated relative to the comprehensive second approach. Additionally, common cognitive assessments (with and without results) were described for both approaches. RESULTS: The two approaches identified the same first dates of cognitive symptoms in 33 (66%) of the 50 patients, first cognitive assessment in 29 (58%) patients and first AD diagnosis in 43 (86%) patients. Allowing for the dates from the two approaches to be within 30 days, the code-based algorithm's success rates increased to 74%, 70% and 94%, respectively. Mini-Mental State Examination was the most commonly observed cognitive assessment in both approaches; however, of the 53 tests performed, only 19 results were observed in the coded data. CONCLUSIONS: The code-based algorithm shows promise for identifying the first AD diagnosis. However, the reliability of using coded data to identify earliest indications of cognitive impairment and cognitive assessments is questionable. Additionally, CPRD is not a recommended data source to identify results of cognitive assessments.

Effectiveness of Florbetapir PET Imaging in Changing Patient Management.

AIMS: To evaluate the impact of amyloid PET imaging on diagnosis and patient management in a multicenter, randomized, controlled study. METHODS: Physicians identified patients seeking a diagnosis for mild cognitive impairment or dementia, possibly due to Alzheimer disease (AD), and recorded a working diagnosis and a management plan. The patients underwent florbetapir PET scanning and were randomized to either immediate or delayed (1-year) feedback regarding amyloid status. At the 3-month visit, the physician updated the diagnosis and recorded a summary of the actual patient management since the post-scan visit. The study examined the impact of immediate versus delayed feedback on patient diagnosis/management at 3 and 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 618 subjects were randomized (1:1) to immediate or delayed feedback arms, and 602 subjects completed the 3-month primary endpoint visit. A higher proportion of patients in the immediate feedback arm showed a change in diagnosis compared to the controls (32.6 vs. 6.4%; p = 0.0001). Similarly, a higher proportion of patients receiving immediate feedback had a change in management plan (68 vs. 55.5%; p < 0.002), mainly driven by changes in AD medication. Specifically, acetylcholinesterase inhibitors were prescribed to 67% of the amyloid-positive and 27% of the amyloid-negative subjects in the information group compared with 56 and 43%, respectively, in the control group (p < 0.0001). These between-group differences persisted until the 12-month visit. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of the amyloid status affects the diagnosis and alters patient management.

Disease Progression in Mild Dementia due to Alzheimer Disease in an 18-Month Observational Study (GERAS): The Impact on Costs and Caregiver Outcomes.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We assessed whether cognitive and functional decline in community-dwelling patients with mild Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia were associated with increased societal costs and caregiver burden and time outcomes. METHODS: Cognitive decline was defined as a ≥3-point reduction in the Mini-Mental State Examination and functional decline as a decrease in the ability to perform one or more basic items of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL) or ≥20% of instrumental ADL items. Total societal costs were estimated from resource use and caregiver hours using 2010 costs. Caregiver burden was assessed using the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI); caregiver supervision and total hours were collected. RESULTS: Of 566 patients with mild AD enrolled in the GERAS study, 494 were suitable for the current analysis. Mean monthly total societal costs were greater for patients showing functional (+61%) or cognitive decline (+27%) compared with those without decline. In relation to a typical mean monthly cost of approximately EUR 1,400 at baseline, this translated into increases over 18 months to EUR 2,254 and 1,778 for patients with functional and cognitive decline, respectively. The number of patients requiring supervision doubled among patients showing functional or cognitive decline compared with those not showing decline, while caregiver total time increased by 70 and 33%, respectively and ZBI total score by 5.3 and 3.4 points, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cognitive and, more notably, functional decline were associated with increases in costs and caregiver outcomes in patients with mild AD dementia.

Describing the Sequence of Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer's Disease Patients: Results from an Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Improved understanding of the pattern of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD) would be useful to assist primary care physicians in explaining AD progression to patients and caregivers. OBJECTIVE: To identify the sequence in which cognitive abilities decline in community-dwelling patients with AD. METHODS: Baseline data were analyzed from 1,495 patients diagnosed with probable AD and a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≤ 26 enrolled in the 18-month observational GERAS study. Proportional odds logistic regression models were applied to model MMSE subscores (orientation, registration, attention and concentration, recall, language, and drawing) and the corresponding subscores of the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog), using MMSE total score as the index of disease progression. Probabilities of impairment start and full impairment were estimated at each MMSE total score level. RESULTS: From the estimated probabilities for each MMSE subscore as a function of the MMSE total score, the first aspect of cognition to start being impaired was recall, followed by orientation in time, attention and concentration, orientation in place, language, drawing, and registration. For full impairment in subscores, the sequence was recall, drawing, attention and concentration, orientation in time, orientation in place, registration, and language. The sequence of cognitive decline for the corresponding ADAS-cog subscores was remarkably consistent with this pattern. CONCLUSION: The sequence of cognitive decline in AD can be visualized in an animation using probability estimates for key aspects of cognition. This might be useful for clinicians to set expectations on disease progression for patients and caregivers.

Effect of Amyloid Imaging on the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Cognitive Decline: Impact of Appropriate Use Criteria.

BACKGROUND: Published appropriate use criteria (AUC) describe patients for whom amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) might be most useful. This study compared the impact of amyloid PET on diagnosis and management in subjects likely to either meet or not meet AUC. METHODS: Physicians provided a provisional diagnosis and management plan for patients presenting with cognitive decline before and after amyloid PET imaging with florbetapir F 18. Participants were classified as AUC-like or not, based on the prescan diagnosis and demographic features. RESULTS: In all, 125 of 229 participants (55%) were classified as AUC-like. Sixty-two percent of the AUC-like subjects had a change in diagnosis after scanning compared with 45% of the non-AUC subjects (p = 0.011). Both groups demonstrated high rates of change in their management plans after scanning (88.0% for AUC-like cases, 85.6% for non-AUC cases). CONCLUSIONS: The impact of amyloid imaging on diagnosis and planned management was maintained and, if anything, amplified in AUC-like patients.

Timely Diagnosis for Alzheimer's Disease: A Literature Review on Benefits and Challenges.

BACKGROUND: Timely diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) refers to a diagnosis at the stage when patients come to the attention of clinicians because of concerns about changes in cognition, behavior, or functioning and can be still free of dementia and functionally independent. OBJECTIVES: To comprehensively review existing scientific evidence on the benefits and potential challenges of making a timely diagnosis of AD. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by searching electronic databases (Medline, Embase) and bibliographies for studies published in English between 1 January 2000 and 2 June 2014 on the consequences of a timely diagnosis of AD. RESULTS: Nine studies were identified that investigated the consequences of diagnosing AD at the initial stages; none were specifically focused on prodromal AD. A timely diagnosis potentially offers the opportunities of early intervention, implementation of coordinated care plans, better management of symptoms, patient safety, cost savings, and postponement of institutionalization. Barriers to making a timely diagnosis include stigma, suicide risk, lack of training, diagnostic uncertainty, shortage of specialized diagnostic services, and the reluctance of healthcare providers to make a diagnosis when no effective disease-modifying options are available. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its potential benefits, few published studies have explored the advantages or risks of a timely diagnosis of AD. In light of the cultural shift toward diagnosis at the initial stage of the disease continuum, when the patient does not yet have dementia, more investigations are needed to evaluate the benefits and address the barriers that may impede making a timely AD diagnosis.