Rapid screening of cognitive change in patients with questionable dementia using the Memory Impairment Screen and the Isaacs Set Test

Effect of transcranial magnetic stimulation as an enhancer of cognitive stimulation sessions on mild cognitive impairment: Preliminary results

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a state between normal cognition and dementia. Currently, there is little evidence of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) as an enhancing tool for Cognitive Stimulation (CS) on MCI. The importance of this study consists in its assessment of the enhancing effect of rTMS on CS in 22 MCI patients randomized and divided into two group: active (AG) and sham (SG). Diagnoses and assessments were determined during 30 sessions over a 10-week period by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Neuropsí test. Results were statistically significant in the intergroup analysis with MoCA and intragroup only for AG.

Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) for the early detection of dementia in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI)

BACKGROUND

Dementia is a progressive global cognitive impairment syndrome. In 2010, more than 35 million people worldwide were estimated to be living with dementia. Some people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) will progress to dementia but others remain stable or recover full function. There is great interest in finding good predictors of dementia in people with MCI. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the best-known and the most often used short screening tool for providing an overall measure of cognitive impairment in clinical, research and community settings.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the accuracy of the Mini Mental State Examination for the early detection of dementia in people with mild cognitive impairment SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Specialized Register of diagnostic and intervention studies (inception to May 2014); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1946 to May 2014); EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to May 2014); BIOSIS (Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); Web of Science Core Collection, including the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); PsycINFO (OvidSP) (inception to May 2014), and LILACS (BIREME) (1982 to May 2014). We also searched specialized sources of diagnostic test accuracy studies and reviews, most recently in May 2014: MEDION (Universities of Maastricht and Leuven, www.mediondatabase.nl), DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, via the Cochrane Library), HTA Database (Health Technology Assessment Database, via the Cochrane Library), and ARIF (University of Birmingham, UK, www.arif.bham.ac.uk). No language or date restrictions were applied to the electronic searches and methodological filters were not used as a method to restrict the search overall so as to maximize sensitivity. We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, tracked citations in Scopus and Science Citation Index, used searches of known relevant studies in PubMed to track related articles, and contacted research groups conducting work on MMSE for dementia diagnosis to try to locate possibly relevant but unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered longitudinal studies in which results of the MMSE administered to MCI participants at baseline were obtained and the reference standard was obtained by follow-up over time. We included participants recruited and clinically classified as individuals with MCI under Petersen and revised Petersen criteria, Matthews criteria, or a Clinical Dementia Rating = 0.5. We used acceptable and commonly used reference standards for dementia in general, Alzheimer's dementia, Lewy body dementia, vascular dementia and frontotemporal dementia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We screened all titles generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently assessed the abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. We assessed the identified full papers for eligibility and extracted data to create two by two tables for dementia in general and other dementias. Two authors independently performed quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. Due to high heterogeneity and scarcity of data, we derived estimates of sensitivity at fixed values of specificity from the model we fitted to produce the summary receiver operating characteristic curve.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review, we included 11 heterogeneous studies with a total number of 1569 MCI patients followed for conversion to dementia. Four studies assessed the role of baseline scores of the MMSE in conversion from MCI to all-cause dementia and eight studies assessed this test in conversion from MCI to Alzheimer´s disease dementia. Only one study provided information about the MMSE and conversion from MCI to vascular dementia. For conversion from MCI to dementia in general, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 23% to 76% and specificities from 40% to 94%. In relationship to conversion from MCI to Alzheimer's disease dementia, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 27% to 89% and specificities from 32% to 90%. Only one study provided information about conversion from MCI to vascular dementia, presenting a sensitivity of 36% and a specificity of 80% with an incidence of vascular dementia of 6.2%. Although we had planned to explore possible sources of heterogeneity, this was not undertaken due to the scarcity of studies included in our analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review did not find evidence supporting a substantial role of MMSE as a stand-alone single-administration test in the identification of MCI patients who could develop dementia. Clinicians could prefer to request additional and extensive tests to be sure about the management of these patients. An important aspect to assess in future updates is if conversion to dementia from MCI stages could be predicted better by MMSE changes over time instead of single measurements. It is also important to assess if a set of tests, rather than an isolated one, may be more successful in predicting conversion from MCI to dementia.

Brazilian Green Propolis Prevents Cognitive Decline into Mild Cognitive Impairment in Elderly People Living at High Altitude

BACKGROUND

Systemic inflammation is known as a risk factor of cognitive decline.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of propolis on cognitive decline and systemic inflammation in elderly people living at high altitude.

METHODS

Sixty participants (average 72.8 years) living at altitude (2,260 meters) were randomized to receive propolis (0.83 g, n = 30) or placebo (n = 30) for 24 months. Cognitive outcomes were assessed using MMSE and serum cytokine levels were measured for 24 months in a double-blind study.

RESULTS

MMSE scores were 26.17 at baseline and 23.87 at 24 months in placebo group. Compared to placebo group, improvements of MMSE scores were significant in propolis-treated subjects (p = 0.007) with a response emerging over time (time points×group interaction, p = 0.016). In addition, the serum IL-1β and IL-6 levels were significantly different across treatments (p < 0.0001) showing upward and downward trends in placebo- and propolis-treated subjects, respectively (p < 0.0001). Serum levels of TNF-α were not significantly different across treatment (p = 0.0528) but with a response emerging over time (time points×group interaction, p = 0.016). In contrast, serum levels of TGFβ1 were significantly different across treatments (p < 0.0001) showing downward and upward trends in placebo- and propolis-treated subjects, respectively. Serum levels of IL-10 were significant for the effect of groups (p = 0.0411). Furthermore, MMSE scores correlated with the decrease in IL-1β and the increase in TGFβ1 in serum.

CONCLUSION

Elderly people living at high altitude developed to MCI in 24 months with exacerbation of systemic inflammation. Ingestion of propolis (>12 months) protected against cognitive decline after systemic inflammation was reduced.

Spectrum Effect and Spectrum Bias in the Screening Test Performance for Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment: What are the Clinical Implications?

BACKGROUND

A single cutoff is widely used to screen amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). However, results of screening test performance are never adjusted for spectrum effect and spectrum bias.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the potential impact of spectrum effect and spectrum bias on screening test performance and clinical decision.

METHODS

The ability of the combination of Memory Impairment Screen (MIS), the Isaacs Set Test (IST), and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) to distinguish aMCI (n = 3,330) from patients with subjective cognitive complaints (SCC) (n = 1,522) was investigated across a wide range of age and educational backgrounds. The spectrum effect was defined as the variation of the sensitivity and/or the specificity across different subgroups. A spectrum bias was highlighted if the likelihood ratio (LR) observed in a subgroup of subjects statistically differed from the LR observed in the overall sample.

RESULTS

For the MIS-IST pairing, the overall sensitivity and specificity were equal to 72.5% and 75.2% , the positive LR (LR+) and the negative LR (LR-) were equal to 2.91 and 0.37, respectively. Across the different age-education subgroups, the sensitivities ranged from 43.7% to 92.5% and specificities from 39.3% to 95.2%. LR+ and LR- ranged from 1.51 to 9.10 and 0.13 to 0.59, respectively. A statistically significant spectrum bias was found in some subgroups and may result in differences between the post-test probabilities. Similar results were also found for the MMSE.

CONCLUSION

These findings could potentially affect the clinician's decision with a possible greater impact in elderly patients with a lower educational level.

Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) for the detection of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI)

BACKGROUND

Dementia is a progressive global cognitive impairment syndrome. In 2010, more than 35 million people worldwide were estimated to be living with dementia. Some people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) will progress to dementia but others remain stable or recover full function. There is great interest in finding good predictors of dementia in people with MCI. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the best-known and the most often used short screening tool for providing an overall measure of cognitive impairment in clinical, research and community settings.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of the MMSE at various thresholds for detecting individuals with baseline MCI who would clinically convert to dementia in general, Alzheimer's disease dementia or other forms of dementia at follow-up.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS (Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Specialized Register of diagnostic and intervention studies (inception to May 2014); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1946 to May 2014); EMBASE (OvidSP) (1980 to May 2014); BIOSIS (Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); Web of Science Core Collection, including the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (ISI Web of Science) (inception to May 2014); PsycINFO (OvidSP) (inception to May 2014), and LILACS (BIREME) (1982 to May 2014). We also searched specialized sources of diagnostic test accuracy studies and reviews, most recently in May 2014: MEDION (Universities of Maastricht and Leuven, www.mediondatabase.nl), DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, via the Cochrane Library), HTA Database (Health Technology Assessment Database, via the Cochrane Library), and ARIF (University of Birmingham, UK, www.arif.bham.ac.uk). No language or date restrictions were applied to the electronic searches and methodological filters were not used as a method to restrict the search overall so as to maximize sensitivity. We also checked reference lists of relevant studies and reviews, tracked citations in Scopus and Science Citation Index, used searches of known relevant studies in PubMed to track related articles, and contacted research groups conducting work on MMSE for dementia diagnosis to try to locate possibly relevant but unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered longitudinal studies in which results of the MMSE administered to MCI participants at baseline were obtained and the reference standard was obtained by follow-up over time. We included participants recruited and clinically classified as individuals with MCI under Petersen and revised Petersen criteria, Matthews criteria, or a Clinical Dementia Rating = 0.5. We used acceptable and commonly used reference standards for dementia in general, Alzheimer's dementia, Lewy body dementia, vascular dementia and frontotemporal dementia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We screened all titles generated by the electronic database searches. Two review authors independently assessed the abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. We assessed the identified full papers for eligibility and extracted data to create two by two tables for dementia in general and other dementias. Two authors independently performed quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. Due to high heterogeneity and scarcity of data, we derived estimates of sensitivity at fixed values of specificity from the model we fitted to produce the summary receiver operating characteristic curve.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review, we included 11 heterogeneous studies with a total number of 1569 MCI patients followed for conversion to dementia. Four studies assessed the role of baseline scores of the MMSE in conversion from MCI to all-cause dementia and eight studies assessed this test in conversion from MCI to Alzheimer´s disease dementia. Only one study provided information about the MMSE and conversion from MCI to vascular dementia. For conversion from MCI to dementia in general, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 23% to 76% and specificities from 40% to 94%. In relationship to conversion from MCI to Alzheimer's disease dementia, the accuracy of baseline MMSE scores ranged from sensitivities of 27% to 89% and specificities from 32% to 90%. Only one study provided information about conversion from MCI to vascular dementia, presenting a sensitivity of 36% and a specificity of 80% with an incidence of vascular dementia of 6.2%. Although we had planned to explore possible sources of heterogeneity, this was not undertaken due to the scarcity of studies included in our analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review did not find evidence supporting a substantial role of MMSE as a stand-alone single-administration test in the identification of MCI patients who could develop dementia. Clinicians could prefer to request additional and extensive tests to be sure about the management of these patients. An important aspect to assess in future updates is if conversion to dementia from MCI stages could be predicted better by MMSE changes over time instead of single measurements. It is also important to assess if a set of tests, rather than an isolated one, may be more successful in predicting conversion from MCI to dementia.

The predictive value of the memory impairment screen in patients with subjective memory complaints: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE

The use of biomarkers in early Alzheimer's disease detection is growing. However, it is not clear whether sophisticated biomarker testing is more efficient than neuropsychological tests focused on memory. The goal of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of the Memory Impairment Screen (MIS), a simple and brief memory test, in elderly subjects with subjective memory loss.

METHOD

A prospective cohort of 105 patients with subjective memory loss was followed up from December 2007 to April 2011 in Zaragoza, Spain. At baseline, the patients underwent neuropsychological examination with Mini-Examen-Cognoscivo (Spanish adaptation of the Mini-Mental State Examination), MIS, Clinical Dementia Rating scale, Blessed Dementia Rating Scale, and Geriatric Depression Scale. The final endpoint of the study was the conversion to dementia, mostly of probable Alzheimer's disease type according to the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke and the Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association work group criteria. The patients were reevaluated every 6 months.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 2 years (range, 1-4 years), 57 patients developed Alzheimer's disease and 48 did not. A baseline score of 0 or 1 on the MIS predicted conversion to Alzheimer's disease, with a sensitivity of 42.9%, a specificity of 98%, and a positive predictive value of 96%. The area under the curve was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

In the clinical setting in patients referred for memory complaints, the MIS score at baseline (0 and 1) is useful to predict who may develop Alzheimer's disease within at least a year. The MIS would be more useful when combined with a higher sensitivity test.

A systematic review of screening tools for predicting the development of dementia

Early detection of dementia is essential to guide front-line health care practitioners in further clinical evaluations and treatments. There is a paucity of literature assessing the effectiveness of screening tools to predict the development of dementia, thus we conducted a systematic review to fill this gap. The purpose of the systematic review was to make recommendations to health care practitioners on which screening tool best predicts the development of dementia and is most feasible in the primary care setting. Ten databases were searched for relevant articles, yielding 751 papers. Of these, 12 met relevance criteria for inclusion. Screening tools were assessed for test accuracy, cognitive domain coverage, predictive ability, and feasibility. Four screening tools were recommended. Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE) was considered to be the ideal tool. A revised version of this tool is now used in clinical practice but the psychometric properties of the ACE-R remain to be established.