Advertisement

Prospective Evaluation of Cognitive Health and Related Factors in Elderly at Risk for Developing Alzheimer’s Dementia: A Longitudinal Cohort Study

  • C. Udeh-Momoh
  • G. Price
  • M. T. Ropacki
  • N. Ketter
  • T. Andrews
  • H. M. Arrighi
  • H. R. Brashear
  • C. Robb
  • D. T. Bassil
  • M. Cohn
  • L. K. Curry
  • B. Su
  • D. Perera
  • P. Giannakopoulou
  • J. Car
  • H. A. Ward
  • R. Perneczky
  • Gerald NovakEmail author
  • L. Middleton
Original Research

Abstract

Background

The CHARIOT PRO Main study is a prospective, non-interventional study evaluating cognitive trajectories in participants at the preclinical stage of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) classified by risk levels for developing mild cognitive impairment due to AD (MCI-AD).

Objectives

The study aimed to characterize factors and markers influencing cognitive and functional progression among individuals at-risk for developing MCI-AD, and examine data for more precise predictors of cognitive change, particularly in relation to APOE ε4 subgroup.

Design

This single-site study was conducted at the Imperial College London (ICL) in the United Kingdom. Participants 60 to 85 years of age were classified as high, medium (amnestic or non-amnestic) or low risk for developing MCI-AD based on RBANS z-scores. A series of clinical outcome assessments (COAs) on factors influencing baseline cognitive changes were collected in each of the instrument categories of cognition, lifestyle exposure, mood, and sleep. Data collection was planned to occur every 6 months for 48 months, however the median follow-up time was 18.1 months due to early termination of study by the sponsor.

Results

987 participants were screened, among them 690 participants were actively followed-up post baseline, of whom 165 (23.9%) were APOE ε4 carriers; with at least one copy of the allele. The mean age was 68.73 years, 94.6% were white, 57.4% were female, and 34.8% had a Family History of Dementia with a somewhat larger percentage in the APOE ε4 carrier group (42.4%) compared to the non-carrier group (32.4%). Over half of the participants were married and 53% had a Bachelor’s or higher degree. Most frequently, safety events typical for this population consisted of upper respiratory tract infection (10.4%), falls (5.2%), hypertension (3.5%) and back pain (3.0%).

Conclusion (clinical relevance)

AD-related measures collected during the CHARIOT PRO Main study will allow identification and evaluation of AD risk factors and markers associated with cognitive performance from the pre-clinical stage. Evaluating the psycho-biological characteristics of these pre-symptomatic individuals in relation to their natural neurocognitive trajectories will enhance current understanding on determinants of the initial signs of cognitive changes linked to AD.

Key words

CHARIOT aging registry cognitive health pre-clinical Alzheimer Disease 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are most grateful to the study participants for their contributions and the investigational site staff for their work on the study. The authors acknowledge Bradford Challis (Janssen Research & Development, LLC) for assistance in preparation and editorial support of this manuscript.

Study funding: Funded by Janssen Research & Development, LLC. The sponsor also provided a formal review of this manuscript.

Conflict of interest/disclosures: Janssen Research & Development, LLC, funded the study. Michael T. Ropacki was formerly an employee of Janssen and is an industry consultant. Gerald. Novak, H. Michael Arrighi, and Nandini Raghavan are employees of Janssen Research & Development, LLC and own stock/stock options in the company. Nzeera Ketter is a former employee, and H. Robert Brashear is an employee of Janssen AI Research & Development, LLC and both own stock/stock options in the company. Jianing Di is an employee of Janssen China Research and Development Center and owns stock/stock options in the company. Lefkos Middleton served as principal study investigator at Imperial College of London (ICL), has a consultancy agreement with Eli Lilly, Astra Zeneca and Takeda and is National Coordinator for the TOMMORROW, Amaranth and Generation Clinical Studies; and does not hold any agreement with any of the funders in relation to patents, products in development relevant to this study or marketed products. Chinedu Udeh-Momoh, Josip Car, Robert Perneczky, Geraint Price, Tresa Andrews and Heather Ward served as co-principal study investigators at ICL for Janssen Research & Development, LLC and all declare no conflict of interest. Catherine Robb, Darina Bassil, Martin Cohn, Parthenia Giannakopoulou, Dinithi Perera, Lisa Curry and Bowen Su were study investigators at ICL and declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards: To ensure the quality and integrity of the research, this study was conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice (GCP) Guidelines, Good Pharmacoepidemiology Practices (GPPs) issued by the International Society for pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE), applicable national guidelines, and to the Declaration of Helsinki 2013, as modified by the 52nd World Medical Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2000, and clarified by the World Medical Assembly (WMA) General Assembly, Washington 2002 and Tokyo 2004. The Chariot-Pro Main study has received National Research Ethics Services approval (15/L0/0711) and internal Imperial College London (ICL) Research Ethics, Joint Research Compliance Office approval (JRCO:15/1C/2791). Prior to consenting onto the Chariot-Pro Main study, participants were provided with a detailed study information sheet outlining study procedures, as well as risks and benefits associated with participation. Participants were provided with a minimum of 48-hours to consider the information provided, and fully understand the study requirements prior to discussing further with study staff, where necessary; after which signed informed consent was obtained prior to undertaking any study procedures at the screening visit.

Supplementary material

42414_2019_31_MOESM1_ESM.docx (78 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 77.7 KB.

References

  1. 1.
    Sperling RA, Aisen PS, Beckett LA, Bennett DA, Craft S, Fagan AM, et al. Toward defining the preclinical stages of Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s & dementia: the journal of the Alzheimer’s Association. 2011;7(3):280–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dubois B, Feldman HH, Jacova C, Cummings JL, Dekosky ST, Barberger-Gateau P, et al. Revising the definition of Alzheimer’s disease: a new lexicon. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(11):1118–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donohue MC, Sperling RA, Petersen R, Sun CK, Weiner MW, Aisen PS. Association Between Elevated Brain Amyloid and Subsequent Cognitive Decline Among Cognitively Normal Persons. JAMA. 2017;317(22):2305–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Albert M, Zhu Y, Moghekar A, Mori S, Miller MI, Soldan A, et al. Predicting progression from normal cognition to mild cognitive impairment for individuals at 5 years. Brain. 2018.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vellas B. Update on Prevention Trials in Alzheimer’s Disease. J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2014;1(3):168–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Larsen ME, Curry L, Mastellos N, Robb C, Car J, Middleton LT. Development of the CHARIOT Research Register for the Prevention of Alzheimer’s Dementia and Other Late Onset Neurodegenerative Diseases. PloS one. 2015;10(11):e0141806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. «Mini-mental state». A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of psychiatric research. 1975;12(3):189–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Randolph C, Tierney MC, Mohr E, Chase TN. The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS): preliminary clinical validity. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1998;20(3):310–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Caselli RJ, Locke DE, Dueck AC, Knopman DS, Woodruff BK, Hoffman-Snyder C, et al. The neuropsychology of normal aging and preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s & dementia: the journal of the Alzheimer’s Association. 2014;10(1):84–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carlozzi NE, Stout JC, Mills JA, Duff K, Beglinger LJ, Aylward EH, et al. Estimating premorbid IQ in the prodromal phase of a neurodegenerative disease. The Clinical neuropsychologist. 2011;25(5):757–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lim YY, Jaeger J, Harrington K, Ashwood T, Ellis KA, Stoffler A, et al. Three-month stability of the CogState brief battery in healthy older adults, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease: results from the Australian Imaging, Biomarkers, and Lifestyle-rate of change substudy (AIBL-ROCS). Archives of clinical neuropsychology: the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists. 2013;28(4):320–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wesnes KA, Annas P, Basun H, Edgar C, Blennow K. Performance on a pattern separation task by Alzheimer’s patients shows possible links between disrupted dentate gyrus activity and apolipoprotein E in4 status and cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-beta42 levels. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2014;6(2):20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wesnes KA, McNamara C, Annas P. Norms for healthy adults aged 18–87 years for the Cognitive Drug Research System: An automated set of tests of attention, information processing and memory for use in clinical trials. J Psychopharmacol. 2016;30(3):263–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Faria CA, Alves HVD, Charchat-Fichman H. The most frequently used tests for assessing executive functions in aging. Dement Neuropsychol. 2015;9(2):149–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yesavage JA, Brink TL, Rose TL, Lum O, Huang V, Adey M, et al. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. Journal of psychiatric research. 1982;17(1):37–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spielberger C, Luschene P, Vagg P, Jacobs A. Manual for the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (Form Y) Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto. SpielbergerManual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory 1983. 1983.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Doody RS, Ferris SH, Salloway S, Sun Y, Goldman R, Watkins WE, et al. Donepezil treatment of patients with MCI: a 48-week randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Neurology. 2009;72(18):1555–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. PharmacoEconomics. 1993;4(5):353–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Horsman J, Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance G. The Health Utilities Index (HUI): concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2003;1:54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969;9(3):179–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Washburn RA, McAuley E, Katula J, Mihalko SL, Boileau RA. The physical activity scale for the elderly (PASE): evidence for validity. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52(7):643–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Booth M. Assessment of physical activity: an international perspective. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2000;71(2 Suppl):S114–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jia X, Craig LC, Aucott LS, Milne AC, McNeill G. Repeatability and validity of a food frequency questionnaire in free-living older people in relation to cognitive function. The journal of nutrition, health & aging. 2008;12(10):735–41.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Netzer NC, Stoohs RA, Netzer CM, Clark K, Strohl KP. Using the Berlin Questionnaire to identify patients at risk for the sleep apnea syndrome. Annals of internal medicine. 1999;131(7):485–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Buysse DJ, Reynolds CF, 3rd, Monk TH, Berman SR, Kupfer DJ. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry research. 1989;28(2):193–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Heffernan AL, Chidgey C, Peng P, Masters CL, Roberts BR. The Neurobiology and Age-Related Prevalence of the epsilon4 Allele of Apolipoprotein E in Alzheimer’s Disease Cohorts. J Mol Neurosci. 2016;60(3):316–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Liu CC, Zhao N, Fu Y, Wang N, Linares C, Tsai CW, et al. ApoE4 Accelerates Early Seeding of Amyloid Pathology. Neuron. 2017;96(5):1024–32e3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vogel JW, Varga Dolezalova M, La Joie R, Marks SM, Schwimmer HD, Landau SM, et al. Subjective cognitive decline and beta-amyloid burden predict cognitive change in healthy elderly. Neurology. 2017;89(19):2002–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ngandu T, Lehtisalo J, Solomon A, Levalahti E, Ahtiluoto S, Antikainen R, et al. A 2 year multidomain intervention of diet, exercise, cognitive training, and vascular risk monitoring versus control to prevent cognitive decline in at-risk elderly people (FINGER): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9984):2255–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Erickson KI, Voss MW, Prakash RS, Basak C, Szabo A, Chaddock L, et al. Exercise training increases size of hippocampus and improves memory. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(7):3017–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Serdi and Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Udeh-Momoh
    • 1
  • G. Price
    • 1
  • M. T. Ropacki
    • 2
  • N. Ketter
    • 3
  • T. Andrews
    • 5
  • H. M. Arrighi
    • 2
  • H. R. Brashear
    • 3
  • C. Robb
    • 1
  • D. T. Bassil
    • 1
  • M. Cohn
    • 1
    • 6
  • L. K. Curry
    • 1
  • B. Su
    • 1
  • D. Perera
    • 1
  • P. Giannakopoulou
    • 1
  • J. Car
    • 6
  • H. A. Ward
    • 7
  • R. Perneczky
    • 1
    • 8
    • 9
  • Gerald Novak
    • 4
    Email author
  • L. Middleton
    • 1
  1. 1.Imperial College London, Neuroepidemiology and Ageing Research, School of Public HealthLondonUK
  2. 2.Janssen Research & Development, LLCFremontUSA
  3. 3.Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research & Development, LLCSouth San FranciscoUSA
  4. 4.Janssen Research & Development, LLCTitusvilleUSA
  5. 5.Central and North West London NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
  6. 6.Imperial College London, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public HealthLondonUK
  7. 7.Imperial College London, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public HealthLondonUK
  8. 8.University Hospital, LMU Munich, Department of Psychiatry and PsychotherapyMünchenGermany
  9. 9.German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE) MunichMünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations