Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions最新文献

{"title":"Correction to Vietnamese Insights into Cognitive Aging Program (VIP): Objectives, study design, and cohort description","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70030","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We apologize for the error.</p>","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70030","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144085050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Dynamic neurocognitive adaptation: A follow-up exposome investigation in aging","authors":"Filippo Cieri,&nbsp;Chad Lee Cross,&nbsp;Giulia Di Francesco,&nbsp;Jessica Zoe Kirkland Caldwell","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70103","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; INTRODUCTION&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Forty-five percent of Alzheimer's disease (AD) cases may be preventable. Validated tools for measuring environmental factors, with precision equal to that of current biological and genetic assessment tools, are currently lacking.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; METHODS&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;We used the dynamic Neurocognitive Adaptation (dNA) scale, our validated tool to explore protective factors in AD, in 410 older adult participants (50% women). The dNA asks participants to recall cognitive, creative, physical, and social activities that they engaged in at seven different time periods in their lives. We examined associations among engagement in these domains using distance correlations and tested differences in domain engagement over time with repeated-measures analysis of variance. We calculated within-subjects comparisons for time and all interactions among time, sex, and education. We examined between-subjects factors for sex, education, and their interaction. From these models, we constructed visualizations of estimated marginal means against time to assess potential patterns of interest.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; RESULTS&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Physical and creative domain engagements were significantly correlated (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; &lt; 0.001) in the full sample, and social engagement correlated with physical (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; &lt; 0.001) and creative (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.047) domains among females. Cognitive engagement increased over time (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; &lt; 0.001) for the full sample, while physical and creative engagement increased from childhood to adolescence, then decreased over time (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; &lt; 0.001). In contrast, social engagement increased from childhood to adolescence, declined through the senior years, and then sharply increased in old age. Overall, women showed higher cognitive engagement (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.024) and men showed higher physical engagement (&lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.011). Education was positively related to higher scores in all domains.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; DISCUSSION&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Our scale provides new insight into the correlation of environmental factors with education, suggests areas for lifestyle intervention, and highlights the importance of sex differences and middle age as a potential transition stage.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Highlights&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;div&gt;\u0000 &lt;ul&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Physical activity decreases and cognitive activity increases through time.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 ","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70103","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144085045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correction to “Statin therapy and risk of Alzheimer's and age-related neurodegenerative diseases”","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70027","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Torrandell-Haro G, Branigan GL, Vitali F, Geifman N, Zissimopoulos JM, Brinton RD. Statin therapy and risk of Alzheimer's and age-related neurodegenerative diseases. <i>Alzheimer's Dement</i>. 2020; 6:e12108.</p><p>In Figure 2B, there was an error in the table where the values for risk reduction (RR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) of simvastatin for dementia and multiple Sclerosis (MS) were mistakenly duplicated. The correct value for simvastatin and risk of dementia is 0.59 (0.56–0.62), whereas the risk of MS was correctly presented as 0.45 (0.33–0.61). The correction in the table within Figure 2B does not change the statistical significance. Figure 2B has been updated to reflect the correct RR (95% CI) value for dementia associated with simvastatin and to address a publication-related adjustment to the X axis of Figure 2B. We sincerely apologize for the error in the RR value for dementia in the table within Figure 2B.</p>","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70027","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144085048","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Three approaches to determining clinically meaningful benefit on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory in dementia clinical trials for agitation","authors":"Kathy Y. Liu,&nbsp;Chineze Ivenso,&nbsp;Rebecca Howard,&nbsp;Penny Rapaport,&nbsp;Suzanne Reeves,&nbsp;Sube Banerjee,&nbsp;Lon S. Schneider,&nbsp;Maria I. Lapid,&nbsp;Agitation MCID Study Group,&nbsp;Robert Howard","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70099","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> INTRODUCTION</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>There is a need to understand the clinical meaningfulness of symptom score changes in treatment trials of dementia-related agitation. We estimated minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for commonly employed agitation scales and contextualized their clinical application.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> METHODS</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We employed anchor- and distribution-based approaches to determine changes in scores corresponding to minimal symptom improvement. An opinion-based approach assessed expert clinicians’ agreement on the meaningfulness of score changes through three clinical vignettes.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> RESULTS</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Minimal symptom improvement for Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory total score ranged from −4 (over &lt;1 month) to −11 (over 1 to 3 months) points. Greater symptom severity correlated with higher MCID estimates. The clinical importance of score changes was influenced by treatment duration, pharmacological side effects, and impacts on caregiver distress/time resources.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The clinical meaningfulness of agitation scale MCIDs is influenced by trial-specific and clinical factors. Shorter trial durations and measuring caregiver distress/time resources enhance the clinical interpretation of agitation treatment outcomes.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Highlights</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>For the CMAI total score, the MCID was −4 points over shorter time scales and −11 points for longer time scales.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Worse agitation severity was associated with higher MCID estimates.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>There was high expert consensus that a noticeable treatment benefit was not worthwhile if it occurred after 12 weeks or had no impact on caregiver/staff distress/time resources.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70099","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143949814","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How do we put meaning into meaningful benefit? Perspectives from the lived experience","authors":"Russ Paulsen,&nbsp;Carla (DeMuro) Romano,&nbsp;Terry Frangiosa,&nbsp;Margaret Mordin,&nbsp;Gabrielle J. Dardis,&nbsp;Dana DiBenedetti,&nbsp;Ronald C. Petersen,&nbsp;Jeffrey L. Cummings","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70095","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70095","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Meaningful benefit is a much-debated concept in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Research to date has primarily focused on change thresholds that are anchored in clinicians’ or care partners’ impressions; however, these thresholds are not inherently meaningful to people living with AD (PLWAD) and may not take their perspectives into account. By overlaying the lived experience of AD through the eyes of individual PLWAD and their care partners with clinical outcomes, we offer an important framework in which to consider meaningful benefit in terms of symptoms, functioning, and outcomes. The PLWAD and care partner interviews and surveys of the What Matters Most (WMM) research program have identified treatment-related needs, preferences, and priorities of people at risk of or living with AD and their care partners across the AD continuum. A WMM conceptual model of disease—created and refined through interviews with PLWAD and care partners across the AD severity spectrum—includes 50 concepts across six domains (social life/activities, thought processing, communication, daily activities, mood/emotion, and general independence) considered important to all PLWAD and care partners. From the PLWAD and care partner perspectives, an increase in time to the onset, development, or worsening of the symptoms in any of these meaningful concepts was considered a meaningful benefit. No single commonly used clinical outcome assessment captures all concepts of importance, nor the importance of time in AD; considering the lived experience and priorities of individuals affected by AD is crucial to put the “meaning” in “meaningful.”</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70095","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143949954","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Incorporating individually defined brain health priorities in clinical trial outcomes: the electronic Person-Specific Outcome Measure approach in the United States","authors":"Stina Saunders,&nbsp;Ali Jannati,&nbsp;Shane Sheehan,&nbsp;Claudio Toro-Serey,&nbsp;Sean Tobyne,&nbsp;Killian McManus,&nbsp;David Bates,&nbsp;John Showalter,&nbsp;Álvaro Pascual-Leone","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70088","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70088","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; INTRODUCTION&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;While a limited number of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been approved in the United States, there is caution in adopting these treatments in clinical use. The electronic Person-Specific Outcome Measure (ePSOM) tool was recently developed to establish whether, besides modifying underlying AD pathology, new treatments exerted sufficient beneficial effects in areas that matter the most to an individual.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; METHODS&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;We conducted a study to understand how findings from the ePSOM UK study applied in the United States. The ePSOM US survey (May 2023 to January 2024) collected primarily free-text responses in personally defined brain health priorities, alongside self-reported confidence in managing these priorities. We used natural language processing (k-means clustering of GloVe vectors) and chi-squared tests to examine differences between the US and UK populations' answers. We used a Mann–Whitney &lt;i&gt;U&lt;/i&gt; test to compare the confidence ratings between participants with and without a self-reported diagnosis of neurodegenerative disease.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; RESULTS&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Our analysis included 764 participants in the United States (68.8% female; 74.2% high educational attainment) with a total of 9010 free-text responses, of whom 53 individuals (6.90%) reported neurodegenerative disease diagnosis. The comparable sample from the UK survey included 4529 participants with a total of 38,056 responses. There were statistically significant differences in the proportion of responses between the US and UK populations. The diagnosis group showed a significant difference in average total scores of self-reported confidence compared with those without a diagnosis (median score 21, interquartile range [IQR] = 17 to 23 vs median score 24, IQR = 22 to 25, &lt;i&gt;U&lt;/i&gt; = 8908, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; &lt; .01).&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; DISCUSSION&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Our study demonstrates heterogeneity in individual-level brain health priorities in the US and differences between the US and UK populations. The diagnosis group was significantly less confident in managing personally meaningful priorities. These findings support our hypothesis that what constitutes meaningful treatment benefits should be determined at an individual rather than group level, and cultural context needs to be considered.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Highlights&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;div&gt;\u0000 &lt;ul&gt;\u0000 ","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70088","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143944469","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Clinical evaluation of medicines for patients with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease in Japan","authors":"Reiko Yanagihara","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70100","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Lecanemab and donanemab were approved in Japan in September 2023 and September 2024, respectively, for the treatment of patients with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Evaluating the efficacy of these drugs requires demonstrating a clinically meaningful delay in symptom progression while ensuring an acceptable safety profile. This paper describes the efficacy assessment in the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency's (PMDA) review, focusing on clinical endpoints, biomarker evaluations, and the role of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in benefit–risk assessment. At present, the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), which assesses both cognitive and functional decline, is one of the most recommended primary endpoints in confirmatory trials. Time-to-progression analysis should be also conducted to support clinical significance. Biomarker evaluations, particularly amyloid beta (Aβ) reduction, should be included as secondary endpoints to confirm the mechanism of action. Though biomarker assessments showed significant Aβ reduction for both anti-amyloid therapies, no direct correlation with clinical outcomes was observed, limiting their use as surrogate endpoints. Therefore, the MCID for clinical symptom progression suppression cannot be inferred based on Aβ reduction. Safety evaluation focused on amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIAs), a key risk associated with anti-Aβ antibody treatments. Under the condition in which ARIA risk is managed through magnetic resonance imaging monitoring and predefined risk mitigation measures, PMDA considers the benefit–risk balance of these anti-amyloid therapies are favorable. While regulatory approval does not require meeting predefined MCID thresholds, it is based on a comprehensive benefit–risk assessment. For regulatory approval, future drugs will be required to demonstrate a benefit–risk balance equivalent to or more favorable than that of the approved anti-Aβ antibody drugs.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Highlights&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;div&gt;\u0000 &lt;ul&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Lecanemab and donanemab were approved in Japan for early Alzheimer's disease in 2023 and 2024, respectively.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Drug efficacy was considered clinically meaningful after comprehensive evaluation.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Biomarker evaluation, including amyloid beta (Aβ), is crucial to support the intended mechanism of action.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Aβ reduction did not correlate with the suppression of clinical symptom progression in individual cases.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;No biomarker is validated as a surrogate, and minimal clinica","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70100","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143944888","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Disentangling minimum clinically important difference for an individual and a population in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease","authors":"Changyu Shen,&nbsp;Robert W. Platt,&nbsp;Shibeshih Belachew,&nbsp;Hiroko H. Dodge","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70093","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70093","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Recent accelerated and traditional approval of anti-amyloid therapies by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients with early Alzheimer's disease has stimulated heated debate on whether or not the benefits of these therapeutic agents achieve a minimum clinically important effect size, or minimum clinically important difference. We argue that these debates are rooted in the entanglement of two fundamentally different concepts, the minimum clinically important difference for an individual versus that of a population. At the core of the indiscrimination between the two concepts is the unrealistic requirement or expectation that a drug should provide the same clinically important effect for every patient in the target population to be considered achieving meaningful benefit for the population. We discuss the difference and connection between the two concepts to facilitate the communication about their difference and relatedness.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Highlights</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <div>\u0000 <ul>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is defined for an individual and population-level mimimum clinically important difference (pMCID) is defined for a population.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>MCID and pMCID are fundamentally different measures.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>We established their connection and showed in general pMCID &lt; MCID.</li>\u0000 \u0000 <li>Discussion of effect size of Alzheimer's disease treatments should clearly distinguish the two measures.</li>\u0000 </ul>\u0000 </div>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70093","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143944887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Community-engaged efforts to increase retention of Black American online registry participants","authors":"Miriam T. Ashford,&nbsp;Anna Aaronson,&nbsp;Danqi Zhu,&nbsp;Xinyue Deng,&nbsp;Sandhya Kannan,&nbsp;Catherine Conti,&nbsp;Roxanne Alaniz,&nbsp;Jennefer Sorce,&nbsp;Carole Cypress,&nbsp;Derek Flenniken,&nbsp;Monica Camacho,&nbsp;Juliet Fockler,&nbsp;Diana Truran,&nbsp;R. Scott Mackin,&nbsp;Carl Hill,&nbsp;Michael W. Weiner,&nbsp;Desiree Byrd,&nbsp;Robert W. Turner II,&nbsp;Heining Cham,&nbsp;Monica Rivera Mindt,&nbsp;Rachel L. Nosheny","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70046","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; INTRODUCTION&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Many longitudinal Alzheimer's disease studies fail to retain Black American adults once enrolled. This limits the generalizability of research findings.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; METHODS&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The Community-Engaged Digital Alzheimer's Research (CEDAR) study developed digital, culturally-informed, community-engaged efforts to increase longitudinal registry task completion of Black American Brain Health Registry (BHR) participants. Difference-in-differences analysis was conducted to compare longitudinal registry task completion rates within groups (before vs. after CEDAR referral) and between groups (enrolled in CEDAR vs. not enrolled).&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; RESULTS&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Of 3888 invited Black American BHR participants, 420 (10.8%) enrolled in CEDAR. For CEDAR participants, we found significant increases in enrollment rate into referral studies and BHR timepoint completion rate after enrollment into CEDAR. Compared to those not enrolled, CEDAR participants had higher rates of: enrollment in referral studies, timepoint completion, initial questionnaire completion, and neuropsychological test completion.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; DISCUSSION&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The results provide preliminary evidence that CEDAR's culturally-informed, community-engaged research efforts were effective at improving engagement of Black American adults in an online longitudinal study. This is evidenced by increased registry engagement before and after enrollment and in comparison to Black American BHR participants not enrolled in CEDAR. These results need to be interpreted cautiously due to selection biases. This strategy can be adapted to other studies and settings.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Highlights&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;div&gt;\u0000 &lt;ul&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;CEDAR is an online AD/ADRD registry engagement intervention for Black participants.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;The intervention is community-engaged, digital, culturally-informed, and multifaceted.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Engagement rates increased before versus during the intervention for enrollees.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Engagement rates decreased over the same time period for non-enrolled participants.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;li&gt;Results need to be interpreted with caution due to selection biases.&lt;/li&gt;\u0000 &lt;/ul&gt;\u0000 ","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70046","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143925880","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The relationship between neurofilament light chain and depressive symptoms according to cognitive status","authors":"Federico Bellelli,&nbsp;Jeremy Raffin,&nbsp;Davide Angioni,&nbsp;Julie Romana,&nbsp;Maria Soto,&nbsp;Julien Delrieu,&nbsp;Philipe De Souto Barreto,&nbsp;for the MAPT/DSA study group","doi":"10.1002/trc2.70048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70048","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; INTRODUCTION&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;Although recent studies have suggested a positive association between plasma neurofilament light chain (NfL) and depressive symptoms, the moderating effect of cognitive performance on this relationship remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between NfL and depressive symptoms in a population of community-dwelling older adults and to determine whether cognitive status could modify this relationship.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; METHODS&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;This is a secondary analysis of the Multidomain Alzheimer Preventive Trial (MAPT), including 512 individuals (60.2% women) with a median age of 76 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 7) and with available data for plasmatic NfL levels. Depressive symptoms and cognitive status were assessed using the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) and the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale, respectively. Multivariable linear regression analyses were conducted to explore the cross-sectional association between GDS-15 (dependent variable) and plasma NfL levels (pg/mL). The interaction between CDR status (binary: 0 or 0.5) and NfL levels in relation to depressive symptoms was also examined, followed by exploratory simple-slope analyses according to CDR status.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; RESULTS&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;No significant association was observed between GDS-15 scores and plasma NfL levels (&lt;i&gt;B&lt;/i&gt; = 0.002, standard error [SE] = 0.001, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.08) in the entire sample. Although the CDR–NfL interaction was not significant (&lt;i&gt;B&lt;/i&gt; = 0.003, SE = 0.002, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.17), exploratory simple-slope analyses revealed that elevated NfL levels were associated with GDS-15 scores (&lt;i&gt;N&lt;/i&gt; = 233, &lt;i&gt;B&lt;/i&gt; = 0.004, SE = 0.002, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.03) among individuals with a CDR 0.5, but not among those with a CDR 0 (&lt;i&gt;N&lt;/i&gt; = 186, &lt;i&gt;p&lt;/i&gt; = 0.81).&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; DISCUSSION&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;NfL levels were not significantly associated with GDS-15 in a population of community-dwelling older adults without dementia. Although no significant CDR–NfL interaction was detected, exploratory analyses suggest that plasma NfL might be associated with GDS-15 scores only among people with a CDR 0.5 (indicative of mild cognitive impairment). Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to elucidate the potential biological differences in depressive symptoms across different cognitive statuses.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Highlights&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;div&gt;\u0000 ","PeriodicalId":53225,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/trc2.70048","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143925872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}