Utility of Clinical Trial Batteries in the Measurement of Alzheimer's and Huntington's Dementia

1996 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erich Mohr ◽  
Denise Walker ◽  
Christopher Randolph ◽  
Margaret Sampson ◽  
Tilak Mendis
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Disease Assessment ◽  
Mild Dementia

Tests used as outcome measures in clinical trials of antidementia agents are not typically employed as part of diagnostic evaluations, and little information exists as to the sensitivity of these tests in terms of either differentiating demented patients from normal individuals or in distinguishing dementias of various types and etiologies. Sensitivity to mild dementia and sensitivity to impairment of various neuropsychological domains are, however, prerequisites for valid use of an instrument as an outcome measure in this context. The present study was undertaken to directly compare six different tests (three traditional psychometric tests and three clinical trial batteries) in terms of their sensitivity to detect and distinguish between mild dementia in patients with either Alzheimer's disease (n = 15) or Huntington's disease (n = 15), when compared to normal controls (n = 15). Tests included the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised, the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale, the Computerized Drug Research (CDR) Cognitive Assessment System, and the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Dementia (RBAD). All of the tests were roughly equivalent in terms of their ability to discriminate normal subjects from mildly demented patients. Only the CDR and RBAD, however, were able to reliably discriminate between the two patient groups. The results are discussed in terms of the applicability of these tests as outcome measures for clinical trials in dementing disorders.

scholarly journals Effect of Age on Clinical Trial Outcome in Participants with Probable Alzheimer’s Disease

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Steven D. Targum ◽  
Lisa Fosdick ◽  
Kristen E. Drake ◽  
Paul B. Rosenberg ◽  
Anna D. Burke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Disease Assessment ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Subject Selection ◽  
Time Interaction ◽  
Intent To Treat

Background: Age may affect treatment outcome in trials of mild probable Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Objective: We examined age as a moderator of outcome in an exploratory study of deep brain stimulation targeting the fornix (DBS-f) region in participants with AD. Methods: Forty-two participants were implanted with DBS electrodes and randomized to double-blind DBS-f stimulation (“on”) or sham DBS-f (“off”) for 12 months. Results: The intervention was safe and well tolerated. However, the selected clinical measures did not differentiate between the “on” and “off” groups in the intent to treat (ITT) population. There was a significant age by time interaction with the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale; ADAS-cog-13 (p = 0.028). Six of the 12 enrolled participants <  65 years old (50%) markedly declined on the ADAS-cog-13 versus only 6.7%of the 30 participants≥65 years old regardless of treatment assignment (p = 0.005). While not significant, post-hoc analyses favored DBS-f “off” versus “on” over 12 months in the <  65 age group but favored DBS-f “on” versus “off” in the≥65 age group on all clinical metrics. On the integrated Alzheimer’s Disease rating scale (iADRS), the effect size contrasting DBS-f “on” versus “off” changed from +0.2 (favoring “off”) in the <  65 group to –0.52 (favoring “on”) in the≥65 age group. Conclusion: The findings highlight issues with subject selection in clinical trials for AD. Faster disease progression in younger AD participants with different AD sub-types may influence the results. Biomarker confirmation and genotyping to differentiate AD subtypes is important for future clinical trials.

A Biomarker Combining Imaging and Neuropsychological Assessment for Tracking Early Alzheimer's Disease in Clinical Trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 429-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nishant Verma ◽  
S. Natasha Beretvas ◽  
Belen Pascual ◽  
Joseph C. Masdeu ◽  
Mia K. Markey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Latent Variable ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
Disease Assessment ◽  
Latent Variable Analysis ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Selection Of

Background: Combining optimized cognitive (Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale- Cognitive subscale, ADAS-Cog) and atrophy markers of Alzheimer's disease for tracking progression in clinical trials may provide greater sensitivity than currently used methods, which have yielded negative results in multiple recent trials. Furthermore, it is critical to clarify the relationship among the subcomponents yielded by cognitive and imaging testing, to address the symptomatic and anatomical variability of Alzheimer's disease. Method: Using latent variable analysis, we thoroughly investigated the relationship between cognitive impairment, as assessed on the ADAS-Cog, and cerebral atrophy. A biomarker was developed for Alzheimer's clinical trials that combines cognitive and atrophy markers. Results: Atrophy within specific brain regions was found to be closely related with impairment in cognitive domains of memory, language, and praxis. The proposed biomarker showed significantly better sensitivity in tracking progression of cognitive impairment than the ADAS-Cog in simulated trials and a real world problem. The biomarker also improved the selection of MCI patients (78.8±4.9% specificity at 80% sensitivity) that will evolve to Alzheimer's disease for clinical trials. Conclusion: The proposed biomarker provides a boost to the efficacy of clinical trials focused in the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) stage by significantly improving the sensitivity to detect treatment effects and improving the selection of MCI patients that will evolve to Alzheimer’s disease.

scholarly journals Saffron for mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zahra Ayati ◽  
Guoyan Yang ◽  
Mohammad Hossein Ayati ◽  
Seyed Ahmad Emami ◽  
Dennis Chang
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Mild Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Cognitive Function ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Randomised Clinical Trials ◽  
Disease Assessment ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Saffron (stigma of Crocus sativus L.) from Iridaceae family is a well-known traditional herbal medicine that has been used for hundreds of years to treat several diseases such as depressive mood, cancer and cardiovascular disorders. Recently, anti-dementia property of saffron has been indicated. However, the effects of saffron for the management of dementia remain controversial. The aim of the present study is to explore the effectiveness and safety of saffron in treating mild cognitive impairment and dementia. Methods An electronic database search of some major English and Chinese databases was conducted until 31st May 2019 to identify relevant randomised clinical trials (RCT). The primary outcome was cognitive function and the secondary outcomes included daily living function, global clinical assessment, quality of life (QoL), psychiatric assessment and safety. Rev-Man 5.3 software was applied to perform the meta-analyses. Results A total of four RCTs were included in this review. The analysis revealed that saffron significantly improves cognitive function measured by the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) and Clinical Dementia Rating Scale-Sums of Boxes (CDR-SB), compared to placebo groups. In addition, there was no significant difference between saffron and conventional medicine, as measured by cognitive scales such as ADAS-cog and CDR-SB. Saffron improved daily living function, but the changes were not statistically significant. No serious adverse events were reported in the included studies. Conclusions Saffron may have the potential to improve cognitive function and activities of daily living in patients with Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, due to limited high-quality studies there is insufficient evidence to make any recommendations for clinical use. Further clinical trials on larger sample sizes are warranted to shed more light on its efficacy and safety.

scholarly journals A 36-week multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 clinical trial of sodium oligomannate for mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s dementia

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shifu Xiao ◽  
Piu Chan ◽  
Tao Wang ◽  
Zhen Hong ◽  
Shuzhen Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Drug Effects ◽  
Disease Assessment ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Background New therapies are urgently needed for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Sodium oligomannate (GV-971) is a marine-derived oligosaccharide with a novel proposed mechanism of action. The first phase 3 clinical trial of GV-971 has been completed in China. Methods We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in participants with mild-to-moderate AD to assess GV-971 efficacy and safety. Participants were randomized to placebo or GV-971 (900 mg) for 36 weeks. The primary outcome was the drug-placebo difference in change from baseline on the 12-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog12). Secondary endpoints were drug-placebo differences on the Clinician’s Interview-Based Impression of Change with caregiver input (CIBIC+), Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) scale, and Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Safety and tolerability were monitored. Results A total of 818 participants were randomized: 408 to GV-971 and 410 to placebo. A significant drug-placebo difference on the ADAS-Cog12 favoring GV-971 was present at each measurement time point, measurable at the week 4 visit and continuing throughout the trial. The difference between the groups in change from baseline was − 2.15 points (95% confidence interval, − 3.07 to − 1.23; p < 0.0001; effect size 0.531) after 36 weeks of treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse event incidence was comparable between active treatment and placebo (73.9%, 75.4%). Two deaths determined to be unrelated to drug effects occurred in the GV-971 group. Conclusions GV-971 demonstrated significant efficacy in improving cognition with sustained improvement across all observation periods of a 36-week trial. GV-971 was safe and well-tolerated. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02293915. Registered on November 19, 2014

P4-066: Alzheimer's disease biomarkers as outcome measures for clinical trials

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. P727-P728
Author(s):  
Anna Caroli ◽  
Annapaola Prestia ◽  
Sara Wade ◽  
Kewei Chen ◽  
Napatkamon Ayutyanont ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Disease Biomarkers

scholarly journals Psychometric Properties of the Clinical Dementia Rating – Sum of Boxes and Other Cognitive and Functional Outcomes in a Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease Population

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
F. McDougall ◽  
C. Edgar ◽  
M. Mertes ◽  
P. Delmar ◽  
P. Fontoura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Disease Assessment ◽  
Clinical Dementia Rating ◽  
Prodromal Ad ◽  
Ceiling Effects ◽  
Prodromal Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Selective Reminding Test

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Dementia Rating–Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) has been proposed as a primary outcome for use in prodromal AD trials. However, the psychometric properties of this, and of other commonly used measures, have not been well-established in this patient population. OBJECTIVE: To describe the psychometric properties of commonly used efficacy measures in a clinical trial of prodromal AD. SETTING: Data were gathered as part of a two-year clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients had biomarker confirmed prodromal AD. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR), Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ), Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale – Cognition Subscale 11 and 13 (ADAS-Cog), Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE), and Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT-IR [words]). Assessments were conducted at least every 24 weeks. RESULTS: For the CDR-SB, test-retest reliability was good (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC]=0.83); internal consistency was 0.65 at baseline but above 0.8 at later assessments. Relationships between the CDR-SB and other measures were as expected (higher correlations with more closely related constructs), and the CDR-SB differentiated between patients with different severities of dementia (-2.9 points difference between CDR-Global Score 0.5 and 1, P<.0001). Floor and ceiling effects on the CDR-SB total score were minimal; however, at baseline there were ceiling effects in the personal care domain. Further detail is provided on the psychometric properties of ADAS-Cog, MMSE, FCSRT-IR and FAQ in this population. CONCLUSION: The psychometric properties of the CDR-SB are adequate in prodromal AD and continued use is warranted in clinical trials. However, there remains scope for improvement in the assessment of functional constructs and development of novel measures should continue.

scholarly journals [P-151]: Associative and item memory as outcome measures for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: A pilot study

2005 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. S58-S58
Author(s):  
Andrew E. Budson ◽  
Hyemi Chong ◽  
Lisa M. Sardinha ◽  
Sibyl Salisbury ◽  
Dorene M. Rentz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Item Memory

Statistical analysis, trial design and duration in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: a review

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 689-697 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. A. Thompson ◽  
D. E. Wright ◽  
C. E. Counsell ◽  
J. Zajicek
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Statistical Methods ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Primary Analysis

ABSTRACTBackground: The social and economic burden of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and its increasing prevalence has led to much work on new treatment strategies and clinical trials. The search for surrogate markers of disease progression continues but traditional parallel group trial designs that use well-established, but often insensitive, clinical outcome measures predominate.Methods: We performed a systematic search across the Cochrane Library and PubMed abstracts published between January 2004 and August 2009. Information regarding the clinical trial methodology, outcome measures, intervention type and primary statistical analysis techniques was extracted and categorized, according to a standard protocol.Results: We identified 149 papers describing results from clinical trials in AD containing sufficient detail for our purposes. The largest proportion (38%) presented results of trials based on tests of cognition as the primary outcome measure. The primary analysis in most papers (85%) was a univariate significance test of a single primary outcome measure.Conclusions: The majority of trials reported a comparison of baseline and end-point assessment over relatively short patient follow-up periods, using univariate statistical methods to compare differences between intervention and control groups in the primary analysis. There is considerable scope to introduce newer statistical methods and trial designs in treatment evaluations in AD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document