Cargando…

Classification, Prediction, and Concordance of Cognitive and Functional Progression in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment in the United States: A Latent Class Analysis

BACKGROUND: Progression trajectories of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are currently not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To classify patients with incident MCI into different latent classes of progression and identify predictors of progression class. METHODS: Participants with incident MC...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mouchet, Julie, Betts, Keith A., Georgieva, Mihaela V., Ionescu-Ittu, Raluca, Butler, Lesley M., Teitsma, Xavier, Delmar, Paul, Kulalert, Thomas, Zhu, JingJing, Lema, Neema, Desai, Urvi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: IOS Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461667/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34219723
http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JAD-210305
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Progression trajectories of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are currently not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To classify patients with incident MCI into different latent classes of progression and identify predictors of progression class. METHODS: Participants with incident MCI were identified from the US National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set (09/2005-02/2019). Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR(®)) Dementia Staging Instrument-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score longitudinal trajectories from MCI diagnosis were fitted using growth mixture models. Predictors of progression class were identified using multivariate multinomial logistic regression models; odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. RESULTS: In total, 21%, 22%, and 57% of participants (N = 830) experienced fast, slow, and no progression on CDR-SB, respectively; for FAQ, these figures were 14%, 23%, and 64%, respectively. CDR-SB and FAQ class membership was concordant for most participants (77%). Older age (≥86 versus≤70 years, OR [95% CI] = 5.26 [1.78–15.54]), one copy of APOE ɛ4 (1.94 [1.08–3.47]), higher baseline CDR-SB (2.46 [1.56–3.88]), lower baseline MMSE (0.85 [0.75–0.97]), and higher baseline FAQ (1.13 [1.02–1.26]) scores were significant predictors of fast progression versus no progression based on CDR-SB (all p < 0.05). Predictors of FAQ class membership were largely similar. CONCLUSION: Approximately a third of participants experienced progression based on CDR-SB or FAQ during the  4-year follow-up period. CDR-SB and FAQ class assignment were concordant for the vast majority of participants. Identified predictors may help the selection of patients at higher risk of progression in future trials.