Denis S Smirnov1, Douglas Galasko1, Steven D Edland1, J Vincent Filoteo1, Lawrence A Hansen1, David P Salmon2. 1. From the Department of Neurosciences (D.S.S., D.G., D.P.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Public Health (S.D.E.), Departments of Psychiatry and Neurosciences (J.V.F.), and Departments of Pathology and Neurosciences (L.A.H.), University of California San Diego. 2. From the Department of Neurosciences (D.S.S., D.G., D.P.S.), Department of Family Medicine and Public Health (S.D.E.), Departments of Psychiatry and Neurosciences (J.V.F.), and Departments of Pathology and Neurosciences (L.A.H.), University of California San Diego. dsalmon@ucsd.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether domain-specific patterns of cognitive impairment and trajectories of decline differed in patients with clinically diagnosed Parkinson disease dementia (PDD) (N = 29) and autopsy-confirmed dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) (N = 58) or Alzheimer disease (AD) (N = 174) and to determine the impact of pooling patients with PDD and DLB in clinical trials targeting cognition. METHODS: Patients were matched on demographics and level of global cognitive impairment. Patterns of cross-sectional performance and longitudinal decline were examined in 4 cognitive domains: Visuospatial, Memory, Executive, and Language. Power analyses were performed to determine the numbers of participants needed to adequately power a hypothetical clinical trial to slow cognitive decline in pure PDD, pure DLB, or a mixed PDD/DLB group. RESULTS: Both DLB and PDD were more impaired and declined more rapidly than AD in the Visuospatial domain. Patients with PDD exhibited the most impairment and fastest decline in Executive, although patients with DLB also declined faster than AD. Memory was more impaired in AD than DLB and in both compared with PDD; however, all 3 groups declined at comparable rates. In contrast, PDD declined at a slower rate on Language measures than DLB or AD. Power analyses suggest that Visuospatial and Executive outcome measures would be most sensitive in PDD, but Memory and Language in DLB. CONCLUSION: DLB and PDD differ from each other, and from AD, in a cognitive domain-specific manner. As such, different outcome measures may be most sensitive to detecting changes in DLB vs PDD, suggesting that the 2 should be analyzed separately in clinical trials.
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether domain-specific patterns of cognitive impairment and trajectories of decline differed in patients with clinically diagnosed Parkinson disease dementia (PDD) (N = 29) and autopsy-confirmed dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) (N = 58) or Alzheimer disease (AD) (N = 174) and to determine the impact of pooling patients with PDD and DLB in clinical trials targeting cognition. METHODS: Patients were matched on demographics and level of global cognitive impairment. Patterns of cross-sectional performance and longitudinal decline were examined in 4 cognitive domains: Visuospatial, Memory, Executive, and Language. Power analyses were performed to determine the numbers of participants needed to adequately power a hypothetical clinical trial to slow cognitive decline in pure PDD, pure DLB, or a mixed PDD/DLB group. RESULTS: Both DLB and PDD were more impaired and declined more rapidly than AD in the Visuospatial domain. Patients with PDD exhibited the most impairment and fastest decline in Executive, although patients with DLB also declined faster than AD. Memory was more impaired in AD than DLB and in both compared with PDD; however, all 3 groups declined at comparable rates. In contrast, PDD declined at a slower rate on Language measures than DLB or AD. Power analyses suggest that Visuospatial and Executive outcome measures would be most sensitive in PDD, but Memory and Language in DLB. CONCLUSION: DLB and PDD differ from each other, and from AD, in a cognitive domain-specific manner. As such, different outcome measures may be most sensitive to detecting changes in DLB vs PDD, suggesting that the 2 should be analyzed separately in clinical trials.
Authors: L Hansen; D Salmon; D Galasko; E Masliah; R Katzman; R DeTeresa; L Thal; M M Pay; R Hofstetter; M Klauber Journal: Neurology Date: 1990-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Joanne M Hamilton; David P Salmon; Douglas Galasko; Dean C Delis; Lawrence A Hansen; Eliezer Masliah; Ronald G Thomas; Leon J Thal Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: C F Lippa; J E Duda; M Grossman; H I Hurtig; D Aarsland; B F Boeve; D J Brooks; D W Dickson; B Dubois; M Emre; S Fahn; J M Farmer; D Galasko; J E Galvin; C G Goetz; J H Growdon; K A Gwinn-Hardy; J Hardy; P Heutink; T Iwatsubo; K Kosaka; V M-Y Lee; J B Leverenz; E Masliah; I G McKeith; R L Nussbaum; C W Olanow; B M Ravina; A B Singleton; C M Tanner; J Q Trojanowski; Z K Wszolek Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-03-13 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Denis S Smirnov; David P Salmon; Douglas Galasko; Vanessa S Goodwill; Lawrence A Hansen; Yu Zhao; Steven D Edland; Gabriel C Léger; Guerry M Peavy; Diane M Jacobs; Robert Rissman; Donald P Pizzo; Annie Hiniker Journal: Neurology Date: 2021-11-22 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Denis S Smirnov; David P Salmon; Douglas Galasko; Steven D Edland; Donald P Pizzo; Vanessa Goodwill; Annie Hiniker Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 11.274
Authors: Joseph R Phillips; Elie Matar; Kaylena A Ehgoetz Martens; Ahmed A Moustafa; Glenda M Halliday; Simon J G Lewis Journal: Mov Disord Clin Pract Date: 2022-06-13
Authors: Dag Aarsland; Lucia Batzu; Glenda M Halliday; Gert J Geurtsen; Clive Ballard; K Ray Chaudhuri; Daniel Weintraub Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: Erica Howard; David J Irwin; Katya Rascovsky; Naomi Nevler; Sanjana Shellikeri; Thomas F Tropea; Meredith Spindler; Andres Deik; Alice Chen-Plotkin; Andrew Siderowf; Nabila Dahodwala; Daniel Weintraub; Leslie M Shaw; John Q Trojanowski; Sanjeev N Vaishnavi; David A Wolk; Dawn Mechanic-Hamilton; James F Morley; John E Duda; Murray Grossman; Katheryn A Q Cousins Journal: Neurology Date: 2021-02-16 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Katherine J Bangen; Denis S Smirnov; Lisa Delano-Wood; Christina E Wierenga; Mark W Bondi; David P Salmon; Douglas Galasko Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 6.982