Hanna Eriksson1, Seyed-Mohammad Fereshtehnejad1, Farshad Falahati1, Bahman Farahmand2, Dorota Religa3, Maria Eriksdotter4. 1. Division of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden Department of Geriatric Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Division of Clinical Geriatrics, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden Department of Geriatric Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to age of onset, Alzheimer's disease (AD) is divided into early onset (EOAD) or late onset (LOAD), but emerging data also suggests that the underlying pathology may be different. Whether differences in clinical care exist is less well investigated. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether there are differences in demographics, diagnostic work-up, and pharmacological treatment between EOAD and LOAD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data on patients with newly diagnosed EOAD (n = 453) and LOAD (n = 4599) was obtained from the Swedish dementia registry (SveDem). Logistic regression models were used to adjust the comparisons for the baseline confounders including gender, cognitive decline, and co-morbidity. RESULTS: The majority of EOAD and LOAD were in the mild stage of the disease when diagnosed. The majority of patients with EOAD went through an extended diagnostic work-up including more technical investigations as well as assessments by neuropsychologists and speech therapists than patients with LOAD. EOAD patients were treated with overall fewer medications but obtained treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors to a higher extent than those with LOAD, while there were no differences between the groups in antidepressant and antipsychotics use. CONCLUSIONS: There are differences between EOAD and LOAD in demographics, diagnostic work-up, and pharmacological treatment. Based on our findings, an extensive work-up should be recommended when EOAD is suspected.
BACKGROUND: Due to age of onset, Alzheimer's disease (AD) is divided into early onset (EOAD) or late onset (LOAD), but emerging data also suggests that the underlying pathology may be different. Whether differences in clinical care exist is less well investigated. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether there are differences in demographics, diagnostic work-up, and pharmacological treatment between EOAD and LOAD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data on patients with newly diagnosed EOAD (n = 453) and LOAD (n = 4599) was obtained from the Swedish dementia registry (SveDem). Logistic regression models were used to adjust the comparisons for the baseline confounders including gender, cognitive decline, and co-morbidity. RESULTS: The majority of EOAD and LOAD were in the mild stage of the disease when diagnosed. The majority of patients with EOAD went through an extended diagnostic work-up including more technical investigations as well as assessments by neuropsychologists and speech therapists than patients with LOAD. EOAD patients were treated with overall fewer medications but obtained treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors to a higher extent than those with LOAD, while there were no differences between the groups in antidepressant and antipsychotics use. CONCLUSIONS: There are differences between EOAD and LOAD in demographics, diagnostic work-up, and pharmacological treatment. Based on our findings, an extensive work-up should be recommended when EOAD is suspected.
Authors: Dorota Religa; Seyed-Mohammad Fereshtehnejad; Pavla Cermakova; Ann-Katrin Edlund; Sara Garcia-Ptacek; Nicklas Granqvist; Anne Hallbäck; Kerstin Kåwe; Bahman Farahmand; Lena Kilander; Ulla-Britt Mattsson; Katarina Nägga; Peter Nordström; Helle Wijk; Anders Wimo; Bengt Winblad; Maria Eriksdotter Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-02-19 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Shimaa A Heikal; Mohamed Salama; Yuliya Richard; Ahmed A Moustafa; Brian Lawlor Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2022-02-07 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Melissa J Bailey-Taylor; Nicolas Poupore; Laurie Theriot Roley; Richard L Goodwin; Brooks Mcphail; Thomas I Nathaniel Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2022-01-26
Authors: Paul M McKeever; Raphael Schneider; Foad Taghdiri; Anna Weichert; Namita Multani; Robert A Brown; Adam L Boxer; Anna Karydas; Bruce Miller; Janice Robertson; Maria Carmela Tartaglia Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2018-03-30 Impact factor: 5.590