OBJECTIVE: To assess the role of the dopaminergic brain reward system (BRS) in apathy associated with Alzheimer disease (AD). DESIGN: BRS function was probed in 20 AD patients using dextroamphetamine (d-amph) challenge. After baseline behavioral testing, patients were given a single 10 mg dose of d-amph. The time course of the subjective response to d-amph was assessed at hourly intervals for 4 hours. SETTING: Three outpatient dementia clinics associated with a university-affiliated hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty AD patients aged 77 +/- 8 years with Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) apathy scores of 3.4 +/- 3.5 and Mini-Mental State Examination scores of 20.4 +/- 5.1. MEASUREMENTS: Patients were classified as apathetic based on an NPI apathy subscore of > or =4. Apathy severity was assessed using the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES). The subjective and behavioral responses to d-amph were assessed using computerized versions of the Addiction Research Centre Inventory (ARCI), Profile of Mood States and Connor's Continuous Performance Task. RESULTS: Repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant interaction between the presence of apathy and the peak subjective response to d-amph on the ARCI, such that while nonapathetic AD patients were responsive to the rewarding effects of d-amph, apathetic patients were not (F(1,17) = 4.93, p = 0.04). Continuous AES scores were predicted by peak ARCI positive effects scores and baseline overall behavioral disturbances (NPI total) in a backward linear regression analysis using the entire study sample (F(2,17) = 10.00, p = 0.01, R(2) = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Apathy in AD is associated with a blunted subjective response to d-amph, which may be indicative of dysfunction in the BRS.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the role of the dopaminergic brain reward system (BRS) in apathy associated with Alzheimer disease (AD). DESIGN: BRS function was probed in 20 ADpatients using dextroamphetamine (d-amph) challenge. After baseline behavioral testing, patients were given a single 10 mg dose of d-amph. The time course of the subjective response to d-amph was assessed at hourly intervals for 4 hours. SETTING: Three outpatientdementia clinics associated with a university-affiliated hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty ADpatients aged 77 +/- 8 years with Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) apathy scores of 3.4 +/- 3.5 and Mini-Mental State Examination scores of 20.4 +/- 5.1. MEASUREMENTS: Patients were classified as apathetic based on an NPI apathy subscore of > or =4. Apathy severity was assessed using the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES). The subjective and behavioral responses to d-amph were assessed using computerized versions of the Addiction Research Centre Inventory (ARCI), Profile of Mood States and Connor's Continuous Performance Task. RESULTS: Repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant interaction between the presence of apathy and the peak subjective response to d-amph on the ARCI, such that while nonapathetic ADpatients were responsive to the rewarding effects of d-amph, apathetic patients were not (F(1,17) = 4.93, p = 0.04). Continuous AES scores were predicted by peak ARCI positive effects scores and baseline overall behavioral disturbances (NPI total) in a backward linear regression analysis using the entire study sample (F(2,17) = 10.00, p = 0.01, R(2) = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Apathy in AD is associated with a blunted subjective response to d-amph, which may be indicative of dysfunction in the BRS.
Authors: Paul B Rosenberg; Krista L Lanctôt; Lea T Drye; Nathan Herrmann; Roberta W Scherer; David L Bachman; Jacobo E Mintzer Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Constantine G Lyketsos; Maria C Carrillo; J Michael Ryan; Ara S Khachaturian; Paula Trzepacz; Joan Amatniek; Jesse Cedarbaum; Robert Brashear; David S Miller Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Krista L Lanctôt; Sarah A Chau; Nathan Herrmann; Lea T Drye; Paul B Rosenberg; Roberta W Scherer; Sandra E Black; Vijay Vaidya; David L Bachman; Jacobo E Mintzer Journal: Int Psychogeriatr Date: 2013-10-29 Impact factor: 3.878
Authors: Roberta W Scherer; Lea Drye; Jacobo Mintzer; Krista Lanctôt; Paul Rosenberg; Nathan Herrmann; Prasad Padala; Olga Brawman-Mintzer; William Burke; Suzanne Craft; Alan J Lerner; Allan Levey; Anton Porsteinsson; Christopher H van Dyck Journal: Trials Date: 2018-01-18 Impact factor: 2.279