Skip to main content
Log in

Evolving early (pre-dementia) Alzheimer’s disease trials: Suit the outcomes to the population and study design

  • Published:
The journal of nutrition, health & aging

Abstract

Assuming that some cases of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) could be prevented or delayed, prevention trials will be developed for this neurodegenerative condition. Initially, stakeholders will have to agree about the definition of prevention—true primary prevention, meaning the prevention of AD neuropathological changes; the prevention of clinical signs and symptoms that often augur AD; or preventing the progression of signs and symptoms to full-blown dementia. True primary prevention trials will have to rely completely upon neuroimaging or biomarker outcomes that reflect AD pathology. On the other hand, trials designed to prevent signs and symptoms of dementia will require researchers to agree on the phenomenology that would constitute an unequivocal endpoint: cognitive worsening on one or more measure compared to a normative group; development of Mild cognitive impairment (MCI); or development of Alzheimer’s dementia. Prevention trials utilizing any of these outcomes in the general public will be large, will have to utilize low risk public health interventions, and might therefore have only a small impact (treatment effect size), especially if the studies are too short or the study populations are too diverse. An alternative to interventions aimed at the general public would be any attempt to prevent signs and symptoms of dementia in individuals thought to be at an increased risk for clinical dementia. These trials could try to reduce the development of signs and symptoms of dementia in cognitively normal subjects, or they could try to prevent progression from some form of Mild Cognitive Impairment to AD, or they could have the more subtle goal of reducing the accumulation of subclinical deficits in MCI subjects. If the populations for these trials are limited to individuals who have abnormal laboratory and neuroimaging studies associated with AD neuropathology, the results will not generalize to biomarker-negative, at risk individuals, who are likely to constitute the majority of any clinically relevant study population. Outcome measures for each study design will depend upon the characteristics of the study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferri CP, Prince M, Brayne C, et al. Global prevalence of dementia: a Delphi consensus study. Lancet 2005;366:2112–2117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cummings JL, Doody R, Clark C. Disease-modifying therapies for Alzheimer disease: challenges to early intervention. Neurology 2007;69:1622–1634.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Thal LJ, Carta A, Doody R, et al. Prevention protocols for Alzheimer disease. Position paper from the International Working Group on Harmonization of Dementia Drug Guidelines. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 1997;11Suppl 3:46–49.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Salthouse TA. Memory aging from 18 to 80. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2003;17:162–167.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rountree SD, Waring SC, Chan WC, Lupo PJ, Darby EJ, Doody RS. Importance of subtle amnestic and nonamnestic deficits in mild cognitive impairment: prognosis and conversion to dementia. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2007;24:476–482.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Haroutunian V, Schnaider-Beeri M, Schmeidler J, et al. Role of the neuropathology of Alzheimer disease in dementia in the oldest-old. Arch Neurol 2008;65:1211–1217.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Klunk WE, Engler H, Nordberg A, et al. Imaging brain amyloid in Alzheimer’s disease with Pittsburgh Compound-B. Ann Neurol 2004;55:306–319.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Small GW, Kepe V, Ercoli LM, et al. PET of brain amyloid and tau in mild cognitive impairment. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2652–2663.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dubois B, Feldman HH, Jacova C et.al. Lancet 2007;6(8):734–746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Braak H, Braak E. Neuropathological stageing of Alzheimer-related changes. Acta Neuropathol 1991;82:239–259.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Petersen RC, Thomas RG, Grundman M, et al. Vitamin E and donepezil for the treatment of mild cognitive impairment. N Engl J Med 2005;352:2379–2388.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Thal LJ, Ferris SH, Kirby L, et al. A randomized, double-blind, study of Rofecoxib in patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment Neuropsychopharmacology 2005;30:1204–1215

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Feldman HH, Ferris S, Winblad B, et.al. Effect of rivastigmine on delay to diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease from mild cognitive impairment: the InDDEx study 2007;6:501–512

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Winblad B, Gauthier S, Scinto L et. al. Safety and efficacy of galantamine in subjects with mild cognitive impairment Neurology 2008;70:2024–2035.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol 1999;56:303–308.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Visser, PJ, Kester A, Jolles J, Verhey F. Ten-year risk of dementia in subjects with mild cognitive impairment Neurology 2006;67:1207.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Doody RS, Ferris SH, Salloway S, et al. Donepezil treatment of patients with MCI: a 48-week randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Neurology 2009;72:1555–1561.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Salloway S, Ferris S, Kluger A, et al. Efficacy of donepezil in mild cognitive impairment: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Neurology 2004;63:651–657.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bouwman FH, Schoonenboom SNM, van der Flier WM, et al. CSF biomarkers and medial temporal lobe atrophy predict dementia in mild cognitive impairment Neurobiology of Aging 2006;28(7):1070–1074

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Shaw L, Vanderstichele H, Knapik-Czajka M et. al. Cerebrospinal fluid biomarker signature in Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative Ann Neurol 2009;65:403–413.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hansson O, Zetterberg H, Buchhave P, et.al. Lancet Neurology 2006;5(3):228–234.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mattsson N, Zetterberg H, Hansson O etal. CSF biomarkers and incipient Alzheimer’s disease in patients with mild cognitive impairment JAMA 2009;302:385–393.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Frisoni GB, Prestia A, Zanetti O et.al. Markers of Alzheimer’s disease in a population attending a memory clinic Alzheimer’s & Dementia 2009;5:307–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Fleisher AS, Sowell BB, Taylor C etal. Clinical predictors of progresson to Alzheimer disease in amnestic mild cognitive impairment Neurology 2007;68:1588–1595.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Doody, R.S. Evolving early (pre-dementia) Alzheimer’s disease trials: Suit the outcomes to the population and study design. J Nutr Health Aging 14, 299–302 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-010-0067-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-010-0067-0

Key words

Navigation