Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T01:55:08.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early detection of Alzheimer’s disease with a total score of the German CERAD

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2010

MICHAEL M. EHRENSPERGER ,
MANFRED BERRES ,
KIRSTEN I. TAYLOR  and
ANDREAS U. MONSCH
MICHAEL M. EHRENSPERGER*
Affiliation:
Department of Geriatrics, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
MANFRED BERRES
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Technology, University of Applied Sciences, Koblenz, Germany
KIRSTEN I. TAYLOR
Affiliation:
Department of Geriatrics, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
ANDREAS U. MONSCH
Affiliation:
Department of Geriatrics, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
*
*Correspondence and reprint requests to: Michael M. Ehrensperger University Hospital Basel, Memory Clinic, Schanzenstrasse 55, 4031 Basel, Switzerland. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The goal of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic discriminability of three different global scores for the German version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry on Alzheimer’s Disease-Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (CERAD-NAB). The CERAD-NAB was administered to 1100 healthy control participants [NC; Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) mean = 28.9] and 352 patients with very mild Alzheimer’s disease (AD; MMSE mean = 26.1) at baseline and subsets of participants at follow-up an average of 2.4 (NC) and 1.2 (AD) years later. We calculated the following global scores: Chandler et al.’s (2005) score (summed raw scores), logistic regression on principal components analysis scores (PCA-LR), and logistic regression on demographically corrected CERAD-NAB variables (LR). Correct classification rates (CCR) were compared with areas under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUC). The CCR of the LR score (AUC = .976) exceeded that of the PCA-LR, while the PCA-LR (AUC = .968) and Chandler (AUC = .968) scores performed comparably. Retest data improved the CCR of the PCA-LR and Chandler (trend) scores. Thus, for the German CERAD-NAB, Chandler et al.’s total score provided an effective global measure of cognitive functioning, whereby the inclusion of retest data tended to improve correct classification of individual cases. (JINS, 2010, 16, 910–920.)

Keywords

DementiaCognitionLongitudinal studyNeuropsychologyNeuropsychological testChange score
Type
Research Articles
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 16 , Issue 5 , September 2010 , pp. 910 - 920
Copyright
Copyright © The International Neuropsychological Society 2010

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

REFERENCES

Aebi, C. (2002). Validierung der neuropsychologischen Testbatterie CERAD-NP: eine Multi-Center Studie [Validation of the CERAD neuropsychological assessment battery: A multi centre study]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental Disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association Press.Google Scholar
Army Individual Test Battery. (1944). Manual of directions and scoring. Washington, DC: War Department, Adjutant General’s Office.Google Scholar
Berres, M., Zehnder, A., Bläsi, S., & Monsch, A.U. (2007). Evaluation of diagnostic scores with adjustment for covariates. Statistics in Medicine, 27, 1777–1790.Google Scholar
Brodaty, H., Corey-Bloom, J., Potocnik, F.C., Truyen, L., Gold, M., & Damaraju, C.R. (2005). Galantamine prolonged-release formulation in the treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 20, 120–132.Google Scholar
Chandler, M.J., Lacritz, L.H., Hynan, L.S., Barnard, H.D., Allen, G., Deschner, M., et al. . (2005). A total score for the CERAD neuropsychological battery. Neurology, 65, 102–106.Google Scholar
Ermini-Fünfschilling, D., & Meier, D. (1995). Gedächtnistraining: Wichtiger Bestandteil der Milieutherapie bei seniler Demenz [Memory training: An important constituent of milieu therapy in senile dementia]. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 28, 190–194.Google Scholar
Fillenbaum, G.G., Unverzagt, F.W., Ganguli, M., Welsh-Bohmer, K.A., & Heyman, A. (2002). The CERAD Neuropsychological Battery: Performance of representative community and tertiary care samples of African-American and European-American elderly. In Ferraro, F.R. (Ed.), Minority and cross-cultural aspects of neuropsychological assessment. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
Folstein, M.F., Folstein, S.E., & 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
Forsberg, A., Engler, H., Almkvist, O., Blomquist, G., Hagman, G., Wall, A., et al. . (2008). PET imaging of amyloid deposition in patients with mild cognitive impairment. Neurobiology of Aging, 29, 1456–1465.Google Scholar
Grimmer, T., Perneczky, R., & Kurz, A. (2008). Aktueller Stand der Immuntherapie bei Alzheimer-Krankheit [Current immune therapy for Alzheimer’s disease]. Nervenarzt, 79, 832–835.Google Scholar
Hanley, J.A., & McNeil, B.J. (1983). A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology, 148, 839–843.Google Scholar
Härting, C., Markowitsch, H.J., Neufeld, H., Calabrese, P., Deisinger, K., & Kessler, J. (Eds.). (2000). Wechsler Gedächtnistest – revidierte Fassung [Wechsler Memory Scale – revised edition]. Bern, Switzerland: Huber.Google Scholar
Kühner, C. (1997). Fragebogen zur Depressionsdiagnostik nach DSM-IV (FDD DSM-IV) [German Version of the Inventory to Diagnose Depression according to DSM-IV]. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
McKhann, G., Drachman, D., Folstein, M., Katzman, R., Price, D., & Stadlan, E.M. (1984). Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: Report of the NINCDS-ADRDA work group under the auspices of department of health and human services task force on Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology, 34, 939–944.Google Scholar
Monsch, A.U., Foldi, N.S., Ermini-Fünfschilling, D.E., Berres, M., Taylor, K.I., Seifritz, E., et al. . (1995). Improving the diagnostic accuracy of the Mini-Mental State Examination. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 92, 145–150.Google Scholar
Monsch, A.U., Thalmann, B., Schneitter, M., Bernasconi, F., Aebi, C., Camachova Davet, Z., et al. . (2000). The Basel Study on the Elderly’s search for preclinical cognitive markers of Alzheimers’s disease. Neurobiology of Aging, 21, 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, J.C., Edland, S., Clark, C., Galasko, D., Koss, E., Mohs, R., et al. . (1993). The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD). Part IV. Ratings of cognitive change in the longitudinal assessment of probable Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology, 43, 2457–2465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, J.C., Heyman, A., Mohs, R.C., Hughes, J.P., van Belle, G., Fillenbaum, G., et al. . (1989). The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD). Part I. Clinical and neuropsychological assessment of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology, 39, 1159–1165.Google Scholar
Morris, J.C., Mohs, R.C., Rogers, H., Fillenbaum, G., & Heyman, A. (1988). Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD) clinical and neuropsychological assessment of Alzheimer’s disease. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 24, 641–652.Google Scholar
Nelson, H.E. (1976). A modified card sorting test sensitive to frontal lobe defects. Cortex, 12, 313–324.Google Scholar
Panisset, M., Roudier, M., Saxton, J., & Boller, F. (1994). Severe impairment battery: A neuropsychological test for severely demented patients. Archives of Neurology, 51, 41–45.Google Scholar
Pike, K.E., Savage, G., Villemagne, V.L., Ng, S., Moss, S.A., Maruff, P., et al. . (2007). Beta-amyloid imaging and memory in non-demented individuals: Evidence for preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. Brain, 130, 2837–2844.Google Scholar
Regard, M., Strauss, E., & Knapp, P. (1982). Children’s production on verbal and non-verbal fluency tasks. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 55, 839–844.Google Scholar
Rogers, S.L., Farlow, M.R., Doody, R.S., Mohs, R., & Friedhoff, L.T. (1998). A 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Donepezil Study Group. Neurology, 50, 136–145.Google Scholar
Rosen, W.G., Mohs, R.C., & Davis, K.L. (1984). A new rating scale for Alzheimer’s disease. American Journal of Psychiatry, 141, 1356–1364.Google ScholarPubMed
Rosetti, H.C., Cullum, C.M., Hynan, L.S., & Lacritz, L.H. (2010). The CERAD neuropsychologic battery total score and the progression of Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 24, 138–142.Google Scholar
Seltzer, B., Zolnouni, P., Nunez, M., Goldman, R., Kumar, D., Ieni, J., et al. . (2004). Efficacy of donepezil in early-stage Alzheimer’s disease: A randomized placebo controlled trial. Archives of Neurology, 61, 1852–1856.Google Scholar
Sheikh, J.I., & Yasavage, J.A. (1986). Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): Recent evidence and development of a shorter version. In Brink, T.L. (Ed.), Clinical gerontology: A guide to assessment and intervention (pp. 165–174). New York: The Haworth Press.Google Scholar
Tariot, P.N., Solomon, P.R., Morris, J.C., Kershaw, P., Lilienfeld, S., & Ding, C. (2000). A 5-month, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of galantamine in AD. Neurology, 54, 2269–2276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thalmann, B., Monsch, A.U., Schneitter, M., Bernasconi, F., Aebi, C., Camachova Davet, Z., et al. . (2000). The CERAD neuropsychological assessment battery (CERAD-NAB) – A minimal dataset as a common tool for German-speaking Europe. Neurobiology of Aging, 21, 30.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L.L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Welsh, K.A., Butters, N., Hughes, J., Mohs, R., & Heyman, A. (1991). Detection of abnormal memory in mild cases of Alzheimer’s disease using CERAD neuropsychological measures. Archives of Neurology, 48, 278–281.Google Scholar
Welsh, K.A., Butters, N., Hughes, J., Mohs, R., & Heyman, A. (1992). Detection and staging of dementia in Alzheimer’s disease: Use of the neuropsychological measures developed for the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s disease (CERAD). Archives of Neurology, 49, 448–452.Google Scholar
Welsh, K.A., Butters, N., Mohs, R.C., Beekly, D., Edland, S., Fillenbaum, G., et al. . (1994). The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD). Part V. A normative study of the neuropsychological battery. Neurology, 44, 609–614.Google Scholar
Winblad, B., Palmer, K., Kivipelto, M., Jelic, V., Fratiglioni, L., Wahlund, L.-O., et al. . (2004). Mild cognitive impairment – beyond controversies, towards a consensus: Report of the International Working Group on Mild Cognitive Impairment. Journal of Internal Medicine, 256, 240–246.Google Scholar
Wouters, H., van Gool, W.A., Schmand, B., & Lindeboom, R. (2008). Revising the ADAS-cog for a more accurate assessment of cognitive impairment. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 22, 236–244.Google Scholar
Zehnder, A.E., Bläsi, S., Berres, M., Spiegel, R., & Monsch, A.U. (2007). Lack of practice effects on neuropsychological tests as early cognitive markers of Alzheimer disease? American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Dementias, 22, 416–426.Google Scholar