Cargando…

Selection of memory clinic patients for CSF biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy

INTRODUCTION: An accurate and timely diagnosis for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is important, both for care and research. The current diagnostic criteria allow the use of CSF biomarkers to provide pathophysiological support for the diagnosis of AD. How these criteria should be operationalized by clinici...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rhodius-Meester, Hanneke F. M., van Maurik, Ingrid S., Koikkalainen, Juha, Tolonen, Antti, Frederiksen, Kristian S., Hasselbalch, Steen G., Soininen, Hilkka, Herukka, Sanna-Kaisa, Remes, Anne M., Teunissen, Charlotte E., Barkhof, Frederik, Pijnenburg, Yolande A. L., Scheltens, Philip, Lötjönen, Jyrki, van der Flier, Wiesje M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6961870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31940390
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226784
_version_ 1783488060366782464
author Rhodius-Meester, Hanneke F. M.
van Maurik, Ingrid S.
Koikkalainen, Juha
Tolonen, Antti
Frederiksen, Kristian S.
Hasselbalch, Steen G.
Soininen, Hilkka
Herukka, Sanna-Kaisa
Remes, Anne M.
Teunissen, Charlotte E.
Barkhof, Frederik
Pijnenburg, Yolande A. L.
Scheltens, Philip
Lötjönen, Jyrki
van der Flier, Wiesje M.
author_facet Rhodius-Meester, Hanneke F. M.
van Maurik, Ingrid S.
Koikkalainen, Juha
Tolonen, Antti
Frederiksen, Kristian S.
Hasselbalch, Steen G.
Soininen, Hilkka
Herukka, Sanna-Kaisa
Remes, Anne M.
Teunissen, Charlotte E.
Barkhof, Frederik
Pijnenburg, Yolande A. L.
Scheltens, Philip
Lötjönen, Jyrki
van der Flier, Wiesje M.
author_sort Rhodius-Meester, Hanneke F. M.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: An accurate and timely diagnosis for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is important, both for care and research. The current diagnostic criteria allow the use of CSF biomarkers to provide pathophysiological support for the diagnosis of AD. How these criteria should be operationalized by clinicians is unclear. Tools that guide in selecting patients in which CSF biomarkers have clinical utility are needed. We evaluated computerized decision support to select patients for CSF biomarker determination. METHODS: We included 535 subjects (139 controls, 286 Alzheimer’s disease dementia, 82 frontotemporal dementia and 28 vascular dementia) from three clinical cohorts. Positive (AD like) and negative (normal) CSF biomarker profiles were simulated to estimate whether knowledge of CSF biomarkers would impact (confidence in) diagnosis. We applied these simulated CSF values and combined them with demographic, neuropsychology and MRI data to initiate CSF testing (computerized decision support approach). We compared proportion of CSF measurements and patients diagnosed with sufficient confidence (probability of correct class ≥0.80) based on an algorithm with scenarios without CSF (only neuropsychology, MRI and APOE), CSF according to the appropriate use criteria (AUC) and CSF for all patients. RESULTS: The computerized decision support approach recommended CSF testing in 140 (26%) patients, which yielded a diagnosis with sufficient confidence in 379 (71%) of all patients. This approach was more efficient than CSF in none (0% CSF, 308 (58%) diagnosed), CSF selected based on AUC (295 (55%) CSF, 350 (65%) diagnosed) or CSF in all (100% CSF, 348 (65%) diagnosed). CONCLUSIONS: We used a computerized decision support with simulated CSF results in controls and patients with different types of dementia. This approach can support clinicians in making a balanced decision in ordering additional biomarker testing. Computer-supported prediction restricts CSF testing to only 26% of cases, without compromising diagnostic accuracy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6961870
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69618702020-01-26 Selection of memory clinic patients for CSF biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy Rhodius-Meester, Hanneke F. M. van Maurik, Ingrid S. Koikkalainen, Juha Tolonen, Antti Frederiksen, Kristian S. Hasselbalch, Steen G. Soininen, Hilkka Herukka, Sanna-Kaisa Remes, Anne M. Teunissen, Charlotte E. Barkhof, Frederik Pijnenburg, Yolande A. L. Scheltens, Philip Lötjönen, Jyrki van der Flier, Wiesje M. PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: An accurate and timely diagnosis for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is important, both for care and research. The current diagnostic criteria allow the use of CSF biomarkers to provide pathophysiological support for the diagnosis of AD. How these criteria should be operationalized by clinicians is unclear. Tools that guide in selecting patients in which CSF biomarkers have clinical utility are needed. We evaluated computerized decision support to select patients for CSF biomarker determination. METHODS: We included 535 subjects (139 controls, 286 Alzheimer’s disease dementia, 82 frontotemporal dementia and 28 vascular dementia) from three clinical cohorts. Positive (AD like) and negative (normal) CSF biomarker profiles were simulated to estimate whether knowledge of CSF biomarkers would impact (confidence in) diagnosis. We applied these simulated CSF values and combined them with demographic, neuropsychology and MRI data to initiate CSF testing (computerized decision support approach). We compared proportion of CSF measurements and patients diagnosed with sufficient confidence (probability of correct class ≥0.80) based on an algorithm with scenarios without CSF (only neuropsychology, MRI and APOE), CSF according to the appropriate use criteria (AUC) and CSF for all patients. RESULTS: The computerized decision support approach recommended CSF testing in 140 (26%) patients, which yielded a diagnosis with sufficient confidence in 379 (71%) of all patients. This approach was more efficient than CSF in none (0% CSF, 308 (58%) diagnosed), CSF selected based on AUC (295 (55%) CSF, 350 (65%) diagnosed) or CSF in all (100% CSF, 348 (65%) diagnosed). CONCLUSIONS: We used a computerized decision support with simulated CSF results in controls and patients with different types of dementia. This approach can support clinicians in making a balanced decision in ordering additional biomarker testing. Computer-supported prediction restricts CSF testing to only 26% of cases, without compromising diagnostic accuracy. Public Library of Science 2020-01-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6961870/ /pubmed/31940390 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226784 Text en © 2020 Rhodius-Meester et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Rhodius-Meester, Hanneke F. M.
van Maurik, Ingrid S.
Koikkalainen, Juha
Tolonen, Antti
Frederiksen, Kristian S.
Hasselbalch, Steen G.
Soininen, Hilkka
Herukka, Sanna-Kaisa
Remes, Anne M.
Teunissen, Charlotte E.
Barkhof, Frederik
Pijnenburg, Yolande A. L.
Scheltens, Philip
Lötjönen, Jyrki
van der Flier, Wiesje M.
Selection of memory clinic patients for CSF biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy
title Selection of memory clinic patients for CSF biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy
title_full Selection of memory clinic patients for CSF biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy
title_fullStr Selection of memory clinic patients for CSF biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy
title_full_unstemmed Selection of memory clinic patients for CSF biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy
title_short Selection of memory clinic patients for CSF biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy
title_sort selection of memory clinic patients for csf biomarker assessment can be restricted to a quarter of cases by using computerized decision support, without compromising diagnostic accuracy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6961870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31940390
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226784
work_keys_str_mv AT rhodiusmeesterhannekefm selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT vanmaurikingrids selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT koikkalainenjuha selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT tolonenantti selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT frederiksenkristians selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT hasselbalchsteeng selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT soininenhilkka selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT herukkasannakaisa selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT remesannem selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT teunissencharlottee selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT barkhoffrederik selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT pijnenburgyolandeal selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT scheltensphilip selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT lotjonenjyrki selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy
AT vanderflierwiesjem selectionofmemoryclinicpatientsforcsfbiomarkerassessmentcanberestrictedtoaquarterofcasesbyusingcomputerizeddecisionsupportwithoutcompromisingdiagnosticaccuracy