RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) identified with visual memory tests conveys an increased risk of Alzheimer's disease (risk-AD) and if the risk-AD differs from that associated with aMCI based on verbal memory tests. PARTICIPANTS: 4,771 participants aged 70.76 (SD = 6.74, 45.4% females) from five community-based studies, each a member of the international COSMIC consortium and from a different country, were classified as having normal cognition (NC) or one of visual, verbal, or combined (visual and verbal) aMCI using international criteria and followed for an average of 2.48 years. Hazard ratios (HR) and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis analyzed the risk-AD with age, sex, education, single/multiple domain aMCI, and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores as covariates. RESULTS: All aMCI groups (n = 760) had a greater risk-AD than NC (n = 4,011; HR range = 3.66 - 9.25). The risk-AD was not different between visual (n = 208, 17 converters) and verbal aMCI (n = 449, 29 converters, HR = 1.70, 95%CI: 0.88, 3.27, p = 0.111). Combined aMCI (n = 103, 12 converters, HR = 2.34, 95%CI: 1.13, 4.84, p = 0.023) had a higher risk-AD than verbal aMCI. Age and MMSE scores were related to the risk-AD. The IPD meta-analyses replicated these results, though with slightly lower HR estimates (HR range = 3.68, 7.43) for aMCI vs. NC. CONCLUSIONS: Although verbal aMCI was most common, a significant proportion of participants had visual-only or combined visual and verbal aMCI. Compared with verbal aMCI, the risk-AD was the same for visual aMCI and higher for combined aMCI. Our results highlight the importance of including both verbal and visual memory tests in neuropsychological assessments to more reliably identify aMCI.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Pivotal trial have shown that patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) receiving ocrelizumab had better outcomes. However, data on ocrelizumab in clinical practice are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the preliminary safety profile and effectiveness of ocrelizumab treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) in a real-world clinical setting. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study including consecutive patients from nine public hospitals in south-eastern Spain who received ocrelizumab after it was approved. RESULTS: A total of 228 MS patients were included (144 with relapsing-remitting MS [RRMS], 25 secondary progressive MS [SPMS], and 59 primary progressive MS [PPMS]). Median follow-up period was 12 months (range, 1-32). No evidence of disease activity (NEDA) status at year 1 was achieved in 91.2% of the relapsing MS (RMS) population, while disability progression was detected in 37.5% of the PPMS patients (median follow-up period, 19 months). The most common adverse events reported were infusion-related reactions and infections, with the most common infections being urinary tract infections followed by upper respiratory infections and COVID-19. INTERPRETATION: The preliminary results in our real-world setting show that ocrelizumab presented excellent results in suppressing disease activity with a favorable and consistent safety profile.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Factores Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Esclerosis Múltiple Crónica Progresiva/tratamiento farmacológico , Esclerosis Múltiple Recurrente-Remitente/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Encéfalo/diagnóstico por imagen , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Reacción en el Punto de Inyección , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Esclerosis Múltiple Crónica Progresiva/diagnóstico por imagen , Esclerosis Múltiple Crónica Progresiva/fisiopatología , Esclerosis Múltiple Recurrente-Remitente/diagnóstico por imagen , Esclerosis Múltiple Recurrente-Remitente/fisiopatología , Estudios Retrospectivos , España , Médula Espinal/diagnóstico por imagen , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the implications of obtaining one or more low scores on a battery of cognitive tests on diagnosing mild cognitive impairment (MCI). DESIGN: Observational longitudinal study. SETTING: Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. PARTICIPANTS: Normal controls (NC, n = 280) and participants with MCI (n = 415) according to Petersen criteria were reclassified using the Jak/Bondi criteria and number of impaired tests (NIT) criteria. MEASUREMENTS: Diagnostic statistics and hazard ratios of progression to Alzheimer's disease (AD) were compared according to diagnostic criteria. RESULTS: The NIT criteria were a better predictor of progression to AD than the Petersen or Jak/Bondi criteria, with optimal sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: Considering normal variability in cognitive test performance when diagnosing MCI may help identify individuals at greatest risk of progression to AD with greater certainty.
Asunto(s)
Disfunción Cognitiva/diagnóstico , Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas/normas , Anciano , Enfermedad de Alzheimer/diagnóstico , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Función Ejecutiva , Femenino , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Escala del Estado Mental/normas , Valores de ReferenciaRESUMEN
Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) is a heterogeneous condition between normal aging and dementia. Upon neuropsychological testing, MCI can be divided into 4 groups: single-domain amnestic MCI (sd-aMCI), multiple-domain amnestic MCI (md-aMCI), single- and multiple-domain nonamnestic MCI (sd-naMCI, md-naMCI). Some controversy exists about whether the risk of progression to Alzheimer's disease (risk-AD) is increased in all MCI subtypes. We meta-analyzed the risk-AD for 4 MCI groups using random-effects metaregression with the Hierarchical Robust Variance Estimator and sample size, criterion for objective cognitive impairment, length of follow-up and source of recruitment as covariates. From a pool of 134 available studies, 81 groups from 33 studies (N = 4,907) were meta-analyzed. All the studies were rated as having a high risk of bias. aMCI is overrepresented in studies from memory clinics. Multivariate analyses showed that md-aMCI had a similar risk-AD relative to sd-aMCI, whereas both sd-naMCI and md-naMCI showed a lower risk-AD compared with sd-aMCI. The risk-AD was significantly associated with differences in sample sizes across studies and between groups within studies. md-aMCI had a similar risk-AD relative to sd-aMCI in studies from memory clinics and in studies in the community. Several potential sources of bias such as blindness of AD diagnosis, the MCI diagnosis approach and the reporting of demographics were associated with the risk-AD. This work provides important data for use in both clinical and research scenarios. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).