OBJECTIVE: PREDICT-HD is a large-scale international study of people with the Huntington disease (HD) CAG-repeat expansion who are not yet diagnosed with HD. The objective of this study was to determine the stage in the HD prodrome at which cognitive differences from CAG-normal controls can be reliably detected. METHOD: For each of 738 HD CAG-expanded participants, we computed estimated years to clinical diagnosis and probability of diagnosis in 5 years based on age and CAG-repeat expansion number (Langbehn, Brinkman, Falush, Paulsen, & Hayden, 2004). We then stratified the sample into groups: NEAR, estimated to be ≤9 years; MID, between 9 and 15 years; and FAR, ≥15 years. The control sample included 168 CAG-normal participants. Nineteen cognitive tasks were used to assess attention, working memory, psychomotor functions, episodic memory, language, recognition of facial emotion, sensory-perceptual functions, and executive functions. RESULTS: Compared with the controls, the NEAR group showed significantly poorer performance on nearly all of the cognitive tests and the MID group on about half of the cognitive tests (p = .05, Cohen's d NEAR as large as -1.17, MID as large as -0.61). One test even revealed significantly poorer performance in the FAR group (Cohen's d = -0.26). Individual tasks accounted for 0.2% to 9.7% of the variance in estimated proximity to diagnosis. Overall, the cognitive battery accounted for 34% of the variance; in comparison, the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale motor score accounted for 11.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Neurocognitive tests are robust clinical indicators of the disease process prior to reaching criteria for motor diagnosis of HD. (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: PREDICT-HD is a large-scale international study of people with the Huntington disease (HD) CAG-repeat expansion who are not yet diagnosed with HD. The objective of this study was to determine the stage in the HD prodrome at which cognitive differences from CAG-normal controls can be reliably detected. METHOD: For each of 738 HDCAG-expanded participants, we computed estimated years to clinical diagnosis and probability of diagnosis in 5 years based on age and CAG-repeat expansion number (Langbehn, Brinkman, Falush, Paulsen, & Hayden, 2004). We then stratified the sample into groups: NEAR, estimated to be ≤9 years; MID, between 9 and 15 years; and FAR, ≥15 years. The control sample included 168 CAG-normal participants. Nineteen cognitive tasks were used to assess attention, working memory, psychomotor functions, episodic memory, language, recognition of facial emotion, sensory-perceptual functions, and executive functions. RESULTS: Compared with the controls, the NEAR group showed significantly poorer performance on nearly all of the cognitive tests and the MID group on about half of the cognitive tests (p = .05, Cohen's d NEAR as large as -1.17, MID as large as -0.61). One test even revealed significantly poorer performance in the FAR group (Cohen's d = -0.26). Individual tasks accounted for 0.2% to 9.7% of the variance in estimated proximity to diagnosis. Overall, the cognitive battery accounted for 34% of the variance; in comparison, the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale motor score accounted for 11.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Neurocognitive tests are robust clinical indicators of the disease process prior to reaching criteria for motor diagnosis of HD. (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved.
Authors: Christian Beste; Carsten Saft; Carsten Konrad; Jürgen Andrich; Anne Habbel; Inga Schepers; Andreas Jansen; Bettina Pfleiderer; Michael Falkenstein Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Kevin M Biglan; Christopher A Ross; Douglas R Langbehn; Elizabeth H Aylward; Julie C Stout; Sarah Queller; Noelle E Carlozzi; Kevin Duff; Leigh J Beglinger; Jane S Paulsen Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2009-09-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: K Duff; J Paulsen; J Mills; L J Beglinger; D J Moser; M M Smith; D Langbehn; J Stout; S Queller; D L Harrington Journal: Neurology Date: 2010-07-07 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Sarah J Tabrizi; Douglas R Langbehn; Blair R Leavitt; Raymund Ac Roos; Alexandra Durr; David Craufurd; Christopher Kennard; Stephen L Hicks; Nick C Fox; Rachael I Scahill; Beth Borowsky; Allan J Tobin; H Diana Rosas; Hans Johnson; Ralf Reilmann; Bernhard Landwehrmeyer; Julie C Stout Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2009-07-29 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Shannon A Johnson; Julie C Stout; Andrea C Solomon; Douglas R Langbehn; Elizabeth H Aylward; Christina B Cruce; Christopher A Ross; Martha Nance; Elise Kayson; Elaine Julian-Baros; Michael R Hayden; Karl Kieburtz; Mark Guttman; David Oakes; Ira Shoulson; Leigh Beglinger; Kevin Duff; Elizabeth Penziner; Jane S Paulsen Journal: Brain Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Sean C Hinton; Jane S Paulsen; Raymond G Hoffmann; Norman C Reynolds; Janice L Zimbelman; Stephen M Rao Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: J S Paulsen; D R Langbehn; J C Stout; E Aylward; C A Ross; M Nance; M Guttman; S Johnson; M MacDonald; L J Beglinger; K Duff; E Kayson; K Biglan; I Shoulson; D Oakes; M Hayden Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2007-12-20 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Miriam A Hickey; Chunni Zhu; Vera Medvedeva; Nicholas R Franich; Michael S Levine; Marie-Françoise Chesselet Journal: Mol Cell Neurosci Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 4.314
Authors: Paul G Unschuld; Richard A E Edden; Aaron Carass; Xinyang Liu; Megan Shanahan; Xin Wang; Kenichi Oishi; Jason Brandt; Susan S Bassett; Graham W Redgrave; Russell L Margolis; Peter C M van Zijl; Peter B Barker; Christopher A Ross Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2012-05-30 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Louisa P Selvadurai; Ian H Harding; Louise A Corben; Monique R Stagnitti; Elsdon Storey; Gary F Egan; Martin B Delatycki; Nellie Georgiou-Karistianis Journal: J Neurol Date: 2016-08-13 Impact factor: 4.849