Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2014
Susceptibility of the conventional criteria for mild cognitive impairment to false-positive diagnostic errors.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Edmonds Emily C, Delano-Wood Lisa, Clark Lindsay R, Jak Amy J, Nation Daniel A, McDonald Carrie R, Libon David J, Au Rhoda, Galasko Douglas, Salmon David P, Bondi Mark W, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We assessed whether mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subtypes could be empirically derived within the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) MCI cohort and examined associated biomarkers and clinical outcomes.
METHODS: Cluster analysis was performed on neuropsychological data from 825 MCI ADNI participants.
RESULTS: Four subtypes emerged: (1) dysnomic (n = 153), (2) dysexecutive (n = 102), (3) amnestic (n = 288), and (4) cluster-derived normal (n = 282) who performed within normal limits on cognitive testing. The cluster-derived normal group had significantly fewer APOE ε4 carriers and fewer who progressed to dementia compared with the other subtypes; they also evidenced cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer's disease biomarker profiles that did not differ from the normative reference group.
CONCLUSIONS: Identification of empirically derived MCI subtypes demonstrates heterogeneity in MCI cognitive profiles that is not captured by conventional criteria. The large cluster-derived normal group suggests that conventional diagnostic criteria are susceptible to false-positive errors, with the result that prior MCI studies may be diluting important biomarker relationships.
METHODS: Cluster analysis was performed on neuropsychological data from 825 MCI ADNI participants.
RESULTS: Four subtypes emerged: (1) dysnomic (n = 153), (2) dysexecutive (n = 102), (3) amnestic (n = 288), and (4) cluster-derived normal (n = 282) who performed within normal limits on cognitive testing. The cluster-derived normal group had significantly fewer APOE ε4 carriers and fewer who progressed to dementia compared with the other subtypes; they also evidenced cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer's disease biomarker profiles that did not differ from the normative reference group.
CONCLUSIONS: Identification of empirically derived MCI subtypes demonstrates heterogeneity in MCI cognitive profiles that is not captured by conventional criteria. The large cluster-derived normal group suggests that conventional diagnostic criteria are susceptible to false-positive errors, with the result that prior MCI studies may be diluting important biomarker relationships.