Gabriela M Morris1, Timothy R Holden2, Hua Weng3, Chengjie Xiong3, Dean W Coble3, Nigel J Cairns4, John C Morris5. 1. Department of Dermatology, St. Louis University School of Medicine. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics and Nutritional Science. 3. Division of Biostatistics. 4. College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Devon, UK. 5. Department of Neurology, Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: The AD8 informant-based screening instrument has been validated with molecular biomarkers of Alzheimer disease (AD) but not with the gold standard of neuropathologic AD. The objective of this study was to validate the AD8 with neuropathologic AD and compare its predictive performance with that of the Mini-Mental State Examination and both participant-derived and informant-derived subjective memory complaint (SMC) regarding the participant. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study at the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center at Washington University included 230 participants, ages 50 to 91 years, who later had a neuropathologic examination. Four dementia screening instruments from their baseline assessment were evaluated: the AD8, Mini-Mental State Examination, participant SMC, and informant SMC. The primary outcome was a neuropathologic diagnosis of AD. RESULTS: The average participant age at baseline was 80.4 years, 48% were female. All 4 dementia screening tests were predictive of neuropathologic AD. There was no significant difference in the predictive performance of the AD8 compared with the other instruments, but the AD8 had superior sensitivity and combined positive and negative predictive values. CONCLUSION: The AD8 is a brief and sensitive screening instrument that may facilitate earlier and more accurate AD diagnosis in a variety of care settings.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: The AD8 informant-based screening instrument has been validated with molecular biomarkers of Alzheimer disease (AD) but not with the gold standard of neuropathologic AD. The objective of this study was to validate the AD8 with neuropathologic AD and compare its predictive performance with that of the Mini-Mental State Examination and both participant-derived and informant-derived subjective memory complaint (SMC) regarding the participant. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study at the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center at Washington University included 230 participants, ages 50 to 91 years, who later had a neuropathologic examination. Four dementia screening instruments from their baseline assessment were evaluated: the AD8, Mini-Mental State Examination, participant SMC, and informant SMC. The primary outcome was a neuropathologic diagnosis of AD. RESULTS: The average participant age at baseline was 80.4 years, 48% were female. All 4 dementia screening tests were predictive of neuropathologic AD. There was no significant difference in the predictive performance of the AD8 compared with the other instruments, but the AD8 had superior sensitivity and combined positive and negative predictive values. CONCLUSION: The AD8 is a brief and sensitive screening instrument that may facilitate earlier and more accurate AD diagnosis in a variety of care settings.
Authors: J E Galvin; C M Roe; K K Powlishta; M A Coats; S J Muich; E Grant; J P Miller; M Storandt; J C Morris Journal: Neurology Date: 2005-08-23 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Melissa J Slavin; Henry Brodaty; Nicole A Kochan; John D Crawford; Julian N Trollor; Brian Draper; Perminder S Sachdev Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Pim van den Dungen; Harm W M van Marwijk; Henriëtte E van der Horst; Eric P Moll van Charante; Janet Macneil Vroomen; Peter M van de Ven; Hein P J van Hout Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2011-05-30 Impact factor: 3.485
Authors: John C Morris; Suzanne E Schindler; Lena M McCue; Krista L Moulder; Tammie L S Benzinger; Carlos Cruchaga; Anne M Fagan; Elizabeth Grant; Brian A Gordon; David M Holtzman; Chengjie Xiong Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Cyndy B Cordell; Soo Borson; Malaz Boustani; Joshua Chodosh; David Reuben; Joe Verghese; William Thies; Leslie B Fried Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2012-12-20 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Gill Livingston; Andrew Sommerlad; Vasiliki Orgeta; Sergi G Costafreda; Jonathan Huntley; David Ames; Clive Ballard; Sube Banerjee; Alistair Burns; Jiska Cohen-Mansfield; Claudia Cooper; Nick Fox; Laura N Gitlin; Robert Howard; Helen C Kales; Eric B Larson; Karen Ritchie; Kenneth Rockwood; Elizabeth L Sampson; Quincy Samus; Lon S Schneider; Geir Selbæk; Linda Teri; Naaheed Mukadam Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 202.731
Authors: Jacqueline C Dominguez; Ma Fe P de Guzman; Ma Lourdes C Joson; Krizelle Fowler; Boots P Natividad; Precy S Cruz; Jose Leo Jiloca; Primitivo B Mactal; Jayvee Dyne Dominguez; Jeffrey Domingo; Jhozel Kim Dominguez-Awao; Macario Reandelar; Jem R Javier; ThienKieuThi Phung; John C Morris; James E Galvin Journal: Int J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2021-10-31