Validity of three risk prediction models for dementia or cognitive impairment in Australia

Potential for reducing dementia risk: association of the CAIDE score with additional lifestyle components from the LIBRA score in a population at high risk of dementia

OBJECTIVES

Various dementia risk scores exist that assess different factors. We investigated the association between the Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Incidence of Dementia (CAIDE) score and modifiable risk factors in the Lifestyle for Brain Health (LIBRA) score in a German population at high risk of Alzheimer's disease.

METHOD

Baseline data of 807 participants of AgeWell.de (mean age: 68.8 years (SD = 4.9)) were analysed. Stepwise multivariable regression was used to examine the association between the CAIDE score and additional risk factors of the LIBRA score. Additionally, we examined the association between dementia risk models and cognitive performance, as measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

RESULTS

High cognitive activity (β = -0.016, p < 0.001) and high fruit and vegetable intake (β = -0.032, p < 0.001) correlated with lower CAIDE scores, while diabetes was associated with higher CAIDE scores (β = 0.191; p = 0.032). Although all were classified as high risk on CAIDE, 31.5% scored ≤0 points on LIBRA, indicating a lower risk of dementia. Higher CAIDE and LIBRA scores were associated with lower cognitive performance.

CONCLUSION

Regular cognitive activities and increased fruit and vegetable intake were associated with lower CAIDE scores. Different participants are classified as being at-risk based on the dementia risk score used.

Incremental Value of Multidomain Risk Factors for Dementia Prediction: A Machine Learning Approach

OBJECTIVE

The current evidence regarding how different predictor domains contributes to predicting incident dementia remains unclear. This study aims to assess the incremental value of five predictor domains when added to a simple dementia risk prediction model (DRPM) for predicting incident dementia in older adults.

DESIGN

Population-based, prospective cohort study.

SETTING

UK Biobank study.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals aged 60 or older without dementia.

MEASUREMENTS

Fifty-five dementia-related predictors were gathered and categorized into clinical and medical history, questionnaire, cognition, polygenetic risk, and neuroimaging domains. Incident dementia (all-cause) and the subtypes, Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD), were determined through hospital and death registries. Ensemble machine learning (ML) DRPMs were employed for prediction. The incremental values of risk predictors were assessed using the percent change in Area Under the Curve (∆AUC%) and the net reclassification index (NRI).

RESULTS

The simple DRPM which included age, body mass index, sex, education, diabetes, hyperlipidaemia, hypertension, depression, smoking, and alcohol consumption yielded an AUC of 0.711 (± 0.008 SD). The five predictor domains exhibited varying levels of incremental value over the basic model when predicting all-cause dementia and the two subtypes. Neuroimaging markers provided the highest incremental value in predicting all-cause dementia (∆AUC% +9.6%) and AD (∆AUC% +16.5%) while clinical and medical history data performed the best at predicting VaD (∆AUC% +12.2%). Combining clinical and medical history, and questionnaire data synergistically enhanced ML DRPM performance.

CONCLUSION

Combining predictors from different domains generally results in better predictive performance. Selecting predictors involves trade-offs, and while neuroimaging markers can significantly enhance predictive accuracy, they may pose challenges in terms of cost or accessibility.

Predictive models of Alzheimer's disease dementia risk in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and critical appraisal

BACKGROUND

Mild cognitive impairment has received widespread attention as a high-risk population for Alzheimer's disease, and many studies have developed or validated predictive models to assess it. However, the performance of the model development remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to provide an overview of prediction models for the risk of Alzheimer's disease dementia in older adults with mild cognitive impairment.

METHOD

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and MEDLINE were systematically searched up to October 19, 2023. We included cohort studies in which risk prediction models for Alzheimer's disease dementia in older adults with mild cognitive impairment were developed or validated. The Predictive Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was employed to assess model bias and applicability. Random-effects models combined model AUCs and calculated (approximate) 95% prediction intervals for estimations. Heterogeneity across studies was evaluated using the I2 statistic, and subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate sources of heterogeneity. Additionally, funnel plot analysis was utilized to identify publication bias.

RESULTS

The analysis included 16 studies involving 9290 participants. Frequency analysis of predictors showed that 14 appeared at least twice and more, with age, functional activities questionnaire, and Mini-mental State Examination scores of cognitive functioning being the most common predictors. From the studies, only two models were externally validated. Eleven studies ultimately used machine learning, and four used traditional modelling methods. However, we found that in many of the studies, there were problems with insufficient sample sizes, missing important methodological information, lack of model presentation, and all of the models were rated as having a high or unclear risk of bias. The average AUC of the 15 best-developed predictive models was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.90).

DISCUSSION

Most published predictive modelling studies are deficient in rigour, resulting in a high risk of bias. Upcoming research should concentrate on enhancing methodological rigour and conducting external validation of models predicting Alzheimer's disease dementia. We also emphasize the importance of following the scientific method and transparent reporting to improve the accuracy, generalizability and reproducibility of study results.

REGISTRATION

This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (Registration ID: CRD42023468780).

Addition of inflammation-related biomarkers to the CAIDE model for risk prediction of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia in a prospective study

BACKGROUND

It is of interest whether inflammatory biomarkers can improve dementia prediction models, such as the widely used Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging and Dementia (CAIDE) model.

METHODS

The Olink Target 96 Inflammation panel was assessed in a nested case-cohort design within a large, population-based German cohort study (n = 9940; age-range: 50-75 years). All study participants who developed dementia over 20 years of follow-up and had complete CAIDE variable data (n = 562, including 173 Alzheimer's disease (AD) and 199 vascular dementia (VD) cases) as well as n = 1,356 controls were selected for measurements. 69 inflammation-related biomarkers were eligible for use. LASSO logistic regression and bootstrapping were utilized to select relevant biomarkers and determine areas under the curve (AUCs).

RESULTS

The CAIDE model 2 (including Apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 carrier status) predicted all-cause dementia, AD, and VD better than CAIDE model 1 (without APOE ε4) with AUCs of 0.725, 0.752 and 0.707, respectively. Although 20, 7, and 4 inflammation-related biomarkers were selected by LASSO regression to improve CAIDE model 2, the AUCs did not increase markedly. CAIDE models 1 and 2 generally performed better in mid-life (50-64 years) than in late-life (65-75 years) sub-samples of our cohort, but again, inflammation-related biomarkers did not improve their predictive abilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a lack of improvement in dementia risk prediction, the selected inflammation-related biomarkers were significantly associated with dementia outcomes and may serve as a starting point to further elucidate the pathogenesis of dementia.

ANU-ADRI scores, tau pathology, and cognition in non-demented adults: the CABLE study

BACKGROUND

It has been reported that the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) could be predicted by the Australian National University Alzheimer Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI) scores. However, among non-demented Chinese adults, the correlations of ANU-ADRI scores with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) core biomarkers and cognition remain unclear.

METHODS

Individuals from the Chinese Alzheimer's Biomarker and LifestyLE (CABLE) study were grouped into three groups (low/intermediate/high risk groups) based on their ANU-ADRI scores. The multiple linear regression models were conducted to investigate the correlations of ANU-ADRI scores with several biomarkers of AD pathology. Mediation model and structural equation model (SEM) were conducted to investigate the mediators of the correlation between ANU-ADRI scores and cognition.

RESULTS

A total of 1078 non-demented elders were included in our study, with a mean age of 62.58 (standard deviation [SD] 10.06) years as well as a female proportion of 44.16% (n = 476). ANU-ADRI scores were found to be significantly related with MMSE (β = -0.264, P < 0.001) and MoCA (β = -0.393, P < 0.001), as well as CSF t-tau (β = 0.236, P < 0.001), p-tau (β = 0.183, P < 0.001), and t-tau/Aβ42 (β = 0.094, P = 0.005). Mediation analyses indicated that the relationships of ANU-ADRI scores with cognitive scores were mediated by CSF t-tau or p-tau (mediating proportions ranging from 4.45% to 10.50%). SEM did not reveal that ANU-ADRI scores affected cognition by tau-related pathology and level of CSF soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (sTREM2).

CONCLUSION

ANU-ADRI scores were associated with cognition and tau pathology. We also revealed a potential pathological mechanism underlying the impact of ANU-ADRI scores on cognition.

A novel, multidomain, primary care nurse-led and mHealth-assisted intervention for dementia risk reduction in middle-aged adults (HAPPI MIND): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Middle-aged multidomain risk reduction interventions targeting modifiable risk factors for dementia may delay or prevent a third of dementia cases in later life. We describe the protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT), HAPPI MIND (Holistic Approach in Primary care for PreventIng Memory Impairment aNd Dementia). HAPPI MIND will evaluate the efficacy of a multidomain, nurse-led, mHealth supported intervention for assessing dementia risk and reducing associated risk factors in middle-aged adults in the Australian primary care setting.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

General practice clinics (n≥26) across Victoria and New South Wales, Australia, will be recruited and randomised. Practice nurses will be trained to implement the HAPPI MIND intervention or a brief intervention. Patients of participating practices aged 45-65 years with ≥2 potential dementia risk factors will be identified and recruited (approximately 15 patients/clinic). Brief intervention participants receive a personalised report outlining their risk factors for dementia based on Australian National University Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI) scores, education booklet and referral to their general practitioner as appropriate. HAPPI MIND participants receive the brief intervention as well as six individualised dementia risk reduction sessions with a nurse trained in motivational interviewing and principles of behaviour change, a personalised risk reduction action plan and access to the purpose-built HAPPI MIND smartphone app for risk factor self-management. Follow-up data collection will occur at 12, 24 and 36 months. Primary outcome is ANU-ADRI score change at 12 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes include change in cognition, quality of life and individual risk factors of dementia.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Project approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: 28273). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at healthcare conferences. If effective in reducing dementia risk, the HAPPI MIND intervention could be integrated into primary care, scaled up nationally and sustained over time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12621001168842.

CogDrisk, ANU-ADRI, CAIDE, and LIBRA Risk Scores for Estimating Dementia Risk

Importance

While the Australian National University-Alzheimer Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI), Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Dementia (CAIDE), and Lifestyle for Brain Health (LIBRA) dementia risk tools have been widely used, a large body of new evidence has emerged since their publication. Recently, Cognitive Health and Dementia Risk Index (CogDrisk) and CogDrisk for Alzheimer disease (CogDrisk-AD) risk tools have been developed for the assessment of dementia and AD risk, respectively, using contemporary evidence; comparison of the relative performance of these risk tools is limited.

Objective

To evaluate the performance of CogDrisk, ANU-ADRI, CAIDE, LIBRA, and modified LIBRA (LIBRA with age and sex estimates from ANU-ADRI) in estimating dementia and AD risks (with CogDrisk-AD and ANU-ADRI).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based cohort study obtained data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (MAP), the Cardiovascular Health Study Cognition Study (CHS-CS), and the Health and Retirement Study-Aging, Demographics and Memory Study (HRS-ADAMS). Participants who were free of dementia at baseline were included. The factors were component variables in the risk tools that included self-reported baseline demographics, medical risk factors, and lifestyle habits. The study was conducted between November 2021 and March 2023, and statistical analysis was performed from January to June 2023.

Main outcomes and measures

Risk scores were calculated based on available factors in each of these cohorts. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated to measure the performance of each risk score. Multiple imputation was used to assess whether missing data may have affected estimates for dementia risk.

Results

Among the 6107 participants in 3 validation cohorts included for this study, 2184 participants without dementia at baseline were available from MAP (mean [SD] age, 80.0 [7.6] years; 1606 [73.5%] female), 548 participants without dementia at baseline were available from HRS-ADAMS (mean [SD] age, 79.5 [6.3] years; 288 [52.5%] female), and 3375 participants without dementia at baseline were available from CHS-CS (mean [SD] age, 74.8 [4.9] years; 1994 [59.1%] female). In all 3 cohorts, a similar AUC for dementia was obtained using CogDrisk, ANU-ADRI, and modified LIBRA (MAP cohort: CogDrisk AUC, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.61-0.69]; ANU-ADRI AUC, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.61-0.69]; modified LIBRA AUC, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.61-0.69]; HRS-ADAMS cohort: CogDrisk AUC, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.71-0.79]; ANU-ADRI AUC, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.70-0.78]; modified LIBRA AUC, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.71-0.79]; CHS-CS cohort: CogDrisk AUC, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.67-0.72]; ANU-ADRI AUC, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.66-0.72]; modified LIBRA AUC, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.68-0.73]). The CAIDE and LIBRA also provided similar but lower AUCs than the 3 aforementioned tools (eg, MAP cohort: CAIDE AUC, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.46-0.54]; LIBRA AUC, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.48-0.57]). The performance of CogDrisk-AD and ANU-ADRI in estimating AD risks was also similar.

Conclusions and relevance

CogDrisk and CogDrisk-AD performed similarly to ANU-ADRI in estimating dementia and AD risks. These results suggest that CogDrisk and CogDrisk-AD, with a greater range of modifiable risk factors compared with other risk tools in this study, may be more informative for risk reduction.