Cargando…

Measuring Resilience and Resistance in Aging and Alzheimer Disease Using Residual Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of consensus on how to optimally define and measure resistance and resilience in brain and cognitive aging. Residual methods use residuals from regression analysis to quantify the capacity to avoid (resistance) or cope (resilience) “better or worse than expe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bocancea, Diana I., van Loenhoud, Anna C., Groot, Colin, Barkhof, Frederik, van der Flier, Wiesje M., Ossenkoppele, Rik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8448552/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34266918
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000012499
_version_ 1784569261633568768
author Bocancea, Diana I.
van Loenhoud, Anna C.
Groot, Colin
Barkhof, Frederik
van der Flier, Wiesje M.
Ossenkoppele, Rik
author_facet Bocancea, Diana I.
van Loenhoud, Anna C.
Groot, Colin
Barkhof, Frederik
van der Flier, Wiesje M.
Ossenkoppele, Rik
author_sort Bocancea, Diana I.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of consensus on how to optimally define and measure resistance and resilience in brain and cognitive aging. Residual methods use residuals from regression analysis to quantify the capacity to avoid (resistance) or cope (resilience) “better or worse than expected” given a certain level of risk or cerebral damage. We reviewed the rapidly growing literature on residual methods in the context of aging and Alzheimer disease (AD) and performed meta-analyses to investigate associations of residual method–based resilience and resistance measures with longitudinal cognitive and clinical outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science databases (consulted until March 2020) and subsequent screening led to 54 studies fulfilling eligibility criteria, including 10 studies suitable for the meta-analyses. RESULTS: We identified articles using residual methods aimed at quantifying resistance (n = 33), cognitive resilience (n = 23), and brain resilience (n = 2). Critical examination of the literature revealed that there is considerable methodologic variability in how the residual measures were derived and validated. Despite methodologic differences across studies, meta-analytic assessments showed significant associations of levels of resistance (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)] 1.12 [1.07–1.17]; p < 0.0001) and levels of resilience (HR [95% CI] 0.46 [0.32–0.68]; p < 0.001) with risk of progression to dementia/AD. Resilience was also associated with rate of cognitive decline (β [95% CI] 0.05 [0.01–0.08]; p < 0.01). DISCUSSION: This review and meta-analysis supports the usefulness of residual methods as appropriate measures of resilience and resistance, as they capture clinically meaningful information in aging and AD. More rigorous methodologic standardization is needed to increase comparability across studies and, ultimately, application in clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8448552
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84485522021-09-20 Measuring Resilience and Resistance in Aging and Alzheimer Disease Using Residual Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Bocancea, Diana I. van Loenhoud, Anna C. Groot, Colin Barkhof, Frederik van der Flier, Wiesje M. Ossenkoppele, Rik Neurology Research Methods in Neurology BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of consensus on how to optimally define and measure resistance and resilience in brain and cognitive aging. Residual methods use residuals from regression analysis to quantify the capacity to avoid (resistance) or cope (resilience) “better or worse than expected” given a certain level of risk or cerebral damage. We reviewed the rapidly growing literature on residual methods in the context of aging and Alzheimer disease (AD) and performed meta-analyses to investigate associations of residual method–based resilience and resistance measures with longitudinal cognitive and clinical outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science databases (consulted until March 2020) and subsequent screening led to 54 studies fulfilling eligibility criteria, including 10 studies suitable for the meta-analyses. RESULTS: We identified articles using residual methods aimed at quantifying resistance (n = 33), cognitive resilience (n = 23), and brain resilience (n = 2). Critical examination of the literature revealed that there is considerable methodologic variability in how the residual measures were derived and validated. Despite methodologic differences across studies, meta-analytic assessments showed significant associations of levels of resistance (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval (CI)] 1.12 [1.07–1.17]; p < 0.0001) and levels of resilience (HR [95% CI] 0.46 [0.32–0.68]; p < 0.001) with risk of progression to dementia/AD. Resilience was also associated with rate of cognitive decline (β [95% CI] 0.05 [0.01–0.08]; p < 0.01). DISCUSSION: This review and meta-analysis supports the usefulness of residual methods as appropriate measures of resilience and resistance, as they capture clinically meaningful information in aging and AD. More rigorous methodologic standardization is needed to increase comparability across studies and, ultimately, application in clinical practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-09-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8448552/ /pubmed/34266918 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000012499 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Methods in Neurology
Bocancea, Diana I.
van Loenhoud, Anna C.
Groot, Colin
Barkhof, Frederik
van der Flier, Wiesje M.
Ossenkoppele, Rik
Measuring Resilience and Resistance in Aging and Alzheimer Disease Using Residual Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title Measuring Resilience and Resistance in Aging and Alzheimer Disease Using Residual Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_full Measuring Resilience and Resistance in Aging and Alzheimer Disease Using Residual Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_fullStr Measuring Resilience and Resistance in Aging and Alzheimer Disease Using Residual Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Measuring Resilience and Resistance in Aging and Alzheimer Disease Using Residual Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_short Measuring Resilience and Resistance in Aging and Alzheimer Disease Using Residual Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
title_sort measuring resilience and resistance in aging and alzheimer disease using residual methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Methods in Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8448552/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34266918
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000012499
work_keys_str_mv AT bocanceadianai measuringresilienceandresistanceinagingandalzheimerdiseaseusingresidualmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vanloenhoudannac measuringresilienceandresistanceinagingandalzheimerdiseaseusingresidualmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT grootcolin measuringresilienceandresistanceinagingandalzheimerdiseaseusingresidualmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT barkhoffrederik measuringresilienceandresistanceinagingandalzheimerdiseaseusingresidualmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT vanderflierwiesjem measuringresilienceandresistanceinagingandalzheimerdiseaseusingresidualmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ossenkoppelerik measuringresilienceandresistanceinagingandalzheimerdiseaseusingresidualmethodsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis