Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T01:50:46.798Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does a cognitive stress test predict progression from mild cognitive impairment to dementia equally well in clinical versus population-based settings?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2018

Joanne C. Beer ,
Beth E. Snitz ,
Chung-Chou H. Chang ,
David A. Loewenstein  and
Mary Ganguli Open the ORCID record for Mary Ganguli [Opens in a new window]
Joanne C. Beer*
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Beth E. Snitz
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Chung-Chou H. Chang
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
David A. Loewenstein
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychiatry, Behavioral Sciences, and Neurology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA Wien Center for Alzheimer's Disease and Memory Disorders, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, FL, USA
Mary Ganguli
Affiliation:
Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA Department of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Joanne C. Beer, Department of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, 7135 Parran Hall, 130 De Soto Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15261. Phone: +1 503 780 0305. Email: [email protected].
Get access

Abstract

Background:

Evidence suggests that semantic interference may be a sensitive indicator of early dementia. We examined the utility of the Semantic Interference Test (SIT), a cognitive stress memory paradigm which taps proactive and retroactive semantic interference, for predicting progression from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia in both a clinical and a population-based sample.

Methods:

Participants with MCI in the clinical (n = 184) and population-based (n = 435) samples were followed for up to four years. We employed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methods to establish optimal thresholds for four different SIT indices. Threshold performance was compared in the two samples using logistic and Cox proportional hazard regression models.

Results:

Within four years, 42 (22.8%) MCI individuals in the clinical sample and 45 (10.3%) individuals in the population-based sample progressed to dementia. Overall classification accuracy of SIT thresholds ranged from 61.4% to 84.8%. Different subtests of the SIT had slightly different performance characteristics in the two samples. However, regression models showed that thresholds established in the clinical sample performed similarly in the population sample before and after adjusting for demographics and other baseline neuropsychological test scores.

Conclusions:

Despite differences in demographic composition and progression rates, baseline SIT scores predicted progression from MCI to dementia similarly in both samples. Thresholds that best predicted progression were slightly below thresholds established for distinguishing between amnestic MCI and cognitively normal subjects in clinical practice. This confirms the utility of the SIT in both clinical and population-based samples and establishes thresholds most predictive of progression of individuals with MCI.

Keywords

Alzheimer's diseasemild cognitive impairmentdementiamemoryneuropsychological tests
Type
Original Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 30 , Issue 10: Issue Theme: Mild Cognitive Impairment , October 2018 , pp. 1435 - 1445
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E. and McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.Google Scholar
Fuld, P. (1981). The Fuld Object Memory Test. Chicago, IL: The Stoelting Instrument Company.Google Scholar
Ganguli, M. et al. (2010a). Cognitive test performance predicts change in functional status at the population level: the MYHAT Project. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 16, 761–770.Google Scholar
Ganguli, M., Chang, C.-C. H., Snitz, B. E., Saxton, J. A., Vanderbilt, J. and Lee, C.-W. (2010b). Prevalence of mild cognitive impairment by multiple classifications: the Monongahela-Youghiogheny Healthy Aging Team (MYHAT) project. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 18, 674–683.Google Scholar
Ganguli, M., Snitz, B., Vander Bilt, J. and Chang, C. C. (2009). How much do depressive symptoms affect cognition at the population level? The Monongahela-Youghiogheny Healthy Aging Team (MYHAT) study. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 24, 1277–1284.Google Scholar
Hughes, C. P., Berg, L., Danziger, W. L., Coben, L. A. and Martin, R. (1982). A new clinical scale for the staging of dementia. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 140, 566–572.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, D. A. et al. (2015). Proactive semantic interference is associated with total and regional abnormal amyloid load in non-demented community-dwelling elders: a preliminary study. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 23, 1276–1279.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, D. A. et al. (2016). A novel cognitive stress test for the detection of preclinical Alzheimer disease: discriminative properties and relation to Amyloid Load. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 24, 804–813.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, D. A., Acevedo, A., Agron, J. and Duara, R. (2007). Vulnerability to proactive semantic interference and progression to dementia among older adults with mild cognitive impairment. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 24, 363–368.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, D. A., Acevedo, A., Luis, C., Crum, T., Barker, W. W. and Duara, R. (2004). Semantic interference deficits and the detection of mild Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment without dementia. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 10, 91–100.Google Scholar
Loewenstein, D. A., Curiel, R. E., Duara, R. and Buschke, H. (2017). Novel cognitive paradigms for the detection of memory impairment in Preclinical Alzheimer's disease. Assessment, 1073191117691608.Google Scholar
Lowenstein, D. (1995). The fuld OME as a more culture-fair memory test in the elderly. Clinical Gerontologist: The Journal of Aging and Mental Health, 15, 52–54.Google Scholar
Mungas, D., Marshall, S. C., Weldon, M., Haan, M. and Reed, B. R. (1996). Age and education correction of Mini-Mental State Examination for English and Spanish-speaking elderly. Neurology, 46, 700–706.Google Scholar
Reitan, R. M. (1958). Validity of the trail making test as an indicator of organic brain damage. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 8, 271–276.Google Scholar
Robin, X. et al. (2011). pROC: an open-source package for R and S+ to analyze and compare ROC curves. BMC Bioinformatics, 12, 77.Google Scholar
Snitz, B. E. et al. (2010). A novel approach to assessing memory at the population level: vulnerability to semantic interference. International Psychogeriatrics, 22, 785–794.Google Scholar
Therneau, T. (2015). A Package for Survival Analysis in S. R Package Version 2.37-7. 2014. Available at: https://cran.r-project.org/package=survival; last accessed November 23, 2017.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1987). Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised (WMS-R). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Beer et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S2 and Figure S1

Download Beer et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 335.3 KB