Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-4hvwz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T19:58:12.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of Selection Criteria Used in Alzheimer's Disease Clinical Trials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

J. Willmer  and
E. Mohr
J. Willmer*
Affiliation:
Division of Neurology, University of Ottawa, SCOHS - EB Pavilion
E. Mohr
Affiliation:
Division of Neurology, University of Ottawa, SCOHS - EB Pavilion
*
75 Bruyere Street, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1N 5C8
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background:

In the absence of a biological marker for Alzheimer's disease (AD), diagnosis has to be achieved using clinical criteria sets such as those outlined in DSM-IV, NINCDS-ADRDA, or ICD-10. As these criteria are quite broadly defined, there may be inter-rater variability in interpretation.

Methods:

Using a previously published CT scan measuring technique which correlates well with diagnoses achieved using the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria as interpreted at our clinic, we chose to independently examine and reach a diagnosis in patients selected for participation in clinical trials of therapeutic agents for the treatment of AD. Forty-four CT scans from six investigators across Canada were examined using this model. All patients had been diagnosed as having AD by NINCDS-ADRDA criteria and were deemed acceptable to participate in a clinical trial.

Results:

The diagnostic concordance achieved in the original published model was 91.5%. The diagnostic concordance in the population currently being studied was 77.3%. However when examined by site, results ranged from 57.1% to 100%. Using the model, an index of atrophy and a probability of diagnosis of AD can be determined. Across sites, there were statistically significant differences in these measures (p ≤ 0.035). The mean probability of diagnosis of AD across sites ranged from 0.56 to 0.94. Although the sites with lower probabilities had slightly lower mean ages and slightly less atrophy, there was no overall correlation of the atrophy measures with age.

Conclusion:

Current results raise the possibility that the selection of patients for AD clinical trials using current diagnostic criteria sets may not be adequate and conclusions with respect to agent efficacy could be flawed.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , February 1998 , pp. 39 - 43
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation 1998

References

REFERENCES

1.Mohr, E, Feldman, H, Gauthier, S. Canadian guidelines for the development of antidementia therapies: a conceptual summary. Can J Neurol Sci 1995;22:62–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Anonymous. The Canadian Study of Health and Aging: risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease in Canada. Neurology 1994; 44: 2073–2080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Ebly, EM, Parhad, IM, Hogan, DB, Fung, TS. Prevalence and types of dementia in the very old: results from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. Neurology 1994; 44: 1593–1600.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Ehlert, FJ, Roeske, WR, Yamamura, HI. Muscarinic receptors and novel strategies for the treatment of age-related brain disorders. Life Sci 1994;55:2135–2145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Fisher, A, Heldman, E, Gurwitz, D, et al. Ml agonists for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Novel properties and clinical update. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1996; 777: 189–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Hock, FJ. Therapeutic approaches for memory impairments. Behav Brain Res 1995; 66: 143–150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Madden, S, Spaldin, V, Park, BK. Clinical pharmacokinetics of tacrine. Clin Pharmacokinet 1995; 28: 449–457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Rother, M, Kittner, B, Rudolphi, K, Rossner, M, Labs, KH. HWA 285 (propentofylline) – a new compound for the treatment of both vascular dementia and dementia of the Alzheimer type. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1996; 777: 404–409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Whitehouse, PJ, Voci, J. Therapeutic trials in Alzheimer’s disease. Curr Opin Neurol 1995; 8: 275–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Breitner, JC. The role of anti-inflammatory drugs in the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Annu Rev Med 1996; 47: 401–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Crismon, ML. Tacrine: first drug approved for Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Pharmacother 1994; 28: 744–751.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Delumeau, JC, Bentue-Ferrer, D, Gandon, JM, et al. Monoamine oxidase inhibitors, cognitive functions and neurodegenerative diseases. J Neural Transm Suppl 1994; 41: 259–266.Google ScholarPubMed
13.McKhann, MD, Drachman, D, Folstein, M, et al. 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 1984; 34: 939–944.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.World Health Organization. The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines. World Health Organization: 1992.Google Scholar
15.American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: Revised, 3rd Edition. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association; 1987.Google Scholar
16.Kukull, WA, Larson, EB, Reifler, BV, et al. The validity of 3 clinical diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1990; 40: 1364–1369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Lopez, OL, Swihart, AA, Becker, JT, et al. Reliability of NINCDSADRDA clinical criteria for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1990; 40: 1517–1522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Baldereschi, M, Amato, MP, Nencini, P, et al. Cross-national interrater agreement on the clinical diagnostic criteria for dementia. WHO-PRA Age-Associated Dementia Working Group, WHOProgram for Research on Aging, Health of Elderly Program. Neurology 1994; 44: 239–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Derouesne, C. Dementia. Diagnostic problems. Therapie 1993; 48: 189–193.Google Scholar
20.Fischer, P, Danielczyk, W, Jellinger, K, et al. Differential diagnosis of dementia diseases. A prospective clinical study with neuropathologic diagnostic verification. Nervenarzt 1991; 62: 408–414.Google Scholar
21.Galasko, D, Hansen, LA, Katzman, R, et al. Clinical-neuropathological correlations in Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. Arch Neurol 1994; 51: 888–895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Joachim, CL, Morris, JH, Selkoe, DJ. Clinically diagnosed Alzheimer’s disease: autopsy results in 150 cases. Ann Neurol 1988;24:50–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Kazee, AM, Eskin, TA, Lapham, LW, et al. Clinicopathologic correlates in Alzheimer’s disease: assessment of clinical and pathologic diagnostic criteria. Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders 1993; 7: 152–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Tierney, MC, Fisher, RH, Lewis, AJ, et al. The NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group criteria for the clinical diagnosis of probable Alzheimer’s disease: a clinicopathologic study of 57 cases. Neurology 1988;38:359–364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Blacker, D, Albert, MS, Bassett, SS, et al. Reliability and validity of NINCDS-ADRDA criteria for Alzheimer’s disease. The National Institute of Mental Health Genetics Initiative. Arch Neurol 1994; 51: 1198–1204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26.Gearing, M, Mirra, SS, Hedreen, JC, et al. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD). Part X. Neuropathology confirmation of the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1995; 45: 461–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Davis, PC, Gearing, M, Gray, L, et al. The CERAD experience, Part VIII: Neuroimaging-neuropathology correlates of temporal lobe changes in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1995; 45: 178–179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Jobst, KA, Hindley, NJ, King, E, Smith, AD . The diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: a question of image? J Clin Psychiatry 1994; 55 (Suppl): 22–31.Google Scholar
29.Jobst, KA, Smith, AD, Szatmari, M, et al. Rapidly progressing atrophy of medial temporal lobe in Alzheimer’s disease. Lancet 1994;343:829–830.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30.Nagy, Z, Jobst, KA, Esiri, MM, et al. Hippocampal pathology reflects memory deficit and brain imaging measurements in Alzheimer’s disease: clinicopathologic correlations using three sets of pathologic diagnostic criteria. Dementia 1996; 7: 76–81.Google ScholarPubMed
31.Willmer, J, Carruthers, A, Guzman, DA, et al. The usefulness of CT scanning in diagnosing dementia of the Alzheimer type. Can J Neurol Sci 1993;20:210–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32.Albert, M, Naeser, MA, Levine, HL, Garvey, AJ. Ventricular size in patients with presenile dementia of the Alzheimer’s type. Arch Neurol 1984; 41: 1258–1263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33.Kennard, ML, Feldman, H, Yamada, T, Jefferies, WA. Serum levels of the iron binding protein p97 are elevated in Alzheimer’s disease. Nature Medicine 1996; 2: 1230–1235.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34.Albert, MS. Cognitive and neurobiologic markers of early Alzheimer disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996; 93: 13547–13551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35.Poirier, J, Delisle, MC, Quirion, R, et al. Apolipoprotein E4 allele as a predictor of cholinergic deficits and treatment outcome in Alzheimer disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1995; 92: 12260–12264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed