Immediate Reactions to Alzheimer Biomarker Disclosure in Cognitively Unimpaired Individuals in a Global Truncated Randomized Trial.

Background and Objectives: Preclinical Alzheimer disease (AD) trials simultaneously test candidate treatments and the implications of disclosing biomarker information to cognitively unimpaired individuals. Methods: The EARLY trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 study conducted in 143 centers across 14 countries from November 2015 to December 2018 after being stopped prematurely because of treatment-related hepatotoxicity. Participants age 60-85 years deemed cognitively unimpaired were disclosed an elevated or not elevated brain amyloid result by a certified clinician. Among 3,686 participants, 2,066 underwent amyloid imaging, 1,394 underwent CSF biomarker assessment, and 226 underwent both. Among biomarker-tested participants with at least one change score on an outcome of interest, 680 with elevated and 2,698 with not elevated amyloid were included in this analysis. We compared the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), the State-Trait Anxiety Scale (STAI), and the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (CSSRS) before disclosure between amyloid groups. After disclosure, we assessed for differences in the Impact of Events Scale (IES, collected 24-72 hours after disclosure), a measure of intrusive thoughts. Additional scales included the Concerns for AD scale. Results: Among 3378 included participants, the mean (SD) age was 69.0 (5.3); most were female (60%) and White race (84%). No differences were observed before disclosure between participants with elevated and not elevated amyloid for the GDS, STAI, or CSSRS. Participants with elevated amyloid demonstrated higher Concerns for AD scores compared with participants with not elevated amyloid before disclosure. Participants with elevated amyloid demonstrated higher IES scores (9.6 [10.8] vs 5.1 [8.0]) after disclosure and increased Concerns about AD. Patterns of reactions (elevated vs not elevated) were similar for biomarker modalities, although scores were lower among those undergoing CSF compared with PET testing. Although score differences were apparent comparing geographical regions, patterns of group differences were similar. Discussion: Although sample bias must be considered, these results suggest that amyloid disclosure resulted in increased perceived risk and mild distress in those learning an elevated result. Although this study did not assess psychological safety, observed associations intrusive thoughts and distress could be important considerations in the future clinical practice.

Centralizing prescreening data collection to inform data-driven approaches to clinical trial recruitment.

BACKGROUND: Recruiting to multi-site trials is challenging, particularly when striving to ensure the randomized sample is demographically representative of the larger disease-suffering population. While previous studies have reported disparities by race and ethnicity in enrollment and randomization, they have not typically investigated whether disparities exist in the recruitment process prior to consent. To identify participants most likely to be eligible for a trial, study sites frequently include a prescreening process, generally conducted by telephone, to conserve resources. Collection and analysis of such prescreening data across sites could provide valuable information to improve understanding of recruitment intervention effectiveness, including whether traditionally underrepresented participants are lost prior to screening. METHODS: We developed an infrastructure within the National Institute on Aging (NIA) Alzheimer's Clinical Trials Consortium (ACTC) to centrally collect a subset of prescreening variables. Prior to study-wide implementation in the AHEAD 3-45 study (NCT NCT04468659), an ongoing ACTC trial recruiting older cognitively unimpaired participants, we completed a vanguard phase with seven study sites. Variables collected included age, self-reported sex, self-reported race, self-reported ethnicity, self-reported education, self-reported occupation, zip code, recruitment source, prescreening eligibility status, reason for prescreen ineligibility, and the AHEAD 3-45 participant ID for those who continued to an in-person screening visit after study enrollment. RESULTS: Each of the sites was able to submit prescreening data. Vanguard sites provided prescreening data on a total of 1029 participants. The total number of prescreened participants varied widely among sites (range 3-611), with the differences driven mainly by the time to receive site approval for the main study. Key learnings instructed design/informatic/procedural changes prior to study-wide launch. CONCLUSION: Centralized capture of prescreening data in multi-site clinical trials is feasible. Identifying and quantifying the impact of central and site recruitment activities, prior to participants signing consent, has the potential to identify and address selection bias, instruct resource use, contribute to effective trial design, and accelerate trial enrollment timelines.

Hemoglobin A1c Levels Modify Associations between Dietary Acid Load and Breast Cancer Recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic acidosis promotes cancer metastasis. No prospective studies have examined the association between dietary acid load and breast cancer recurrence among breast cancer survivors, who are susceptible to metabolic acidosis. Hyperglycemia promotes cancer progression and acid formation; however, researchers have not examined whether hyperglycemia can modify the association between dietary acid load and breast cancer recurrence. METHODS: We studied 3081 early-stage breast cancer survivors enrolled in the Women's Healthy Eating and Living study who provided dietary information through 24-h recalls at baseline and during follow-up and had measurements of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at baseline. We assessed dietary acid load using two common dietary acid load scores, potential renal acid load (PRAL) score and net endogenous acid production (NEAP) score. RESULTS: After an average of 7.3 years of follow-up, dietary acid load was positively associated with recurrence when baseline HbA1c levels were ≥ 5.6% (median level) and ≥5.7% (pre-diabetic cut-point). In the stratum with HbA1c ≥ 5.6%, comparing the highest to the lowest quartile of dietary acid load, the multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio was 2.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-3.48) for PRAL and was 2.31 (95% CI 1.42-3.74) for NEAP. No associations were observed in the stratum with HbA1c levels were <5.6%. P-values for interactions were 0.01 for PRAL and 0.05 for NEAP. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated for the first time that even at or above normal to high HbA1c levels, dietary acid load was associated with increased risk of breast cancer recurrence among breast cancer survivors. IMPACTS: Our study provides strong evidence for developing specific dietary acid load guidelines based on HbA1c levels.