Cargando…

Avoid or Embrace? Practice Effects in Alzheimer’s Disease Prevention Trials

Demonstrating a slowing in the rate of cognitive decline is a common outcome measure in clinical trials in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Selection of cognitive endpoints typically includes modeling candidate outcome measures in the many, richly phenotyped observational cohort studies available. An impor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aschenbrenner, Andrew J., Hassenstab, Jason, Wang, Guoqiao, Li, Yan, Xiong, Chengjie, McDade, Eric, Clifford, David B., Salloway, Stephen, Farlow, Martin, Yaari, Roy, Cheng, Eden Y. J., Holdridge, Karen C., Mummery, Catherine J., Masters, Colin L., Hsiung, Ging-Yuek, Surti, Ghulam, Day, Gregory S., Weintraub, Sandra, Honig, Lawrence S., Galvin, James E., Ringman, John M., Brooks, William S., Fox, Nick C., Snyder, Peter J., Suzuki, Kazushi, Shimada, Hiroyuki, Gräber, Susanne, Bateman, Randall J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9244171/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35783127
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2022.883131
_version_ 1784738465938669568
author Aschenbrenner, Andrew J.
Hassenstab, Jason
Wang, Guoqiao
Li, Yan
Xiong, Chengjie
McDade, Eric
Clifford, David B.
Salloway, Stephen
Farlow, Martin
Yaari, Roy
Cheng, Eden Y. J.
Holdridge, Karen C.
Mummery, Catherine J.
Masters, Colin L.
Hsiung, Ging-Yuek
Surti, Ghulam
Day, Gregory S.
Weintraub, Sandra
Honig, Lawrence S.
Galvin, James E.
Ringman, John M.
Brooks, William S.
Fox, Nick C.
Snyder, Peter J.
Suzuki, Kazushi
Shimada, Hiroyuki
Gräber, Susanne
Bateman, Randall J.
author_facet Aschenbrenner, Andrew J.
Hassenstab, Jason
Wang, Guoqiao
Li, Yan
Xiong, Chengjie
McDade, Eric
Clifford, David B.
Salloway, Stephen
Farlow, Martin
Yaari, Roy
Cheng, Eden Y. J.
Holdridge, Karen C.
Mummery, Catherine J.
Masters, Colin L.
Hsiung, Ging-Yuek
Surti, Ghulam
Day, Gregory S.
Weintraub, Sandra
Honig, Lawrence S.
Galvin, James E.
Ringman, John M.
Brooks, William S.
Fox, Nick C.
Snyder, Peter J.
Suzuki, Kazushi
Shimada, Hiroyuki
Gräber, Susanne
Bateman, Randall J.
author_sort Aschenbrenner, Andrew J.
collection PubMed
description Demonstrating a slowing in the rate of cognitive decline is a common outcome measure in clinical trials in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Selection of cognitive endpoints typically includes modeling candidate outcome measures in the many, richly phenotyped observational cohort studies available. An important part of choosing cognitive endpoints is a consideration of improvements in performance due to repeated cognitive testing (termed “practice effects”). As primary and secondary AD prevention trials are comprised predominantly of cognitively unimpaired participants, practice effects may be substantial and may have considerable impact on detecting cognitive change. The extent to which practice effects in AD prevention trials are similar to those from observational studies and how these potential differences impact trials is unknown. In the current study, we analyzed data from the recently completed DIAN-TU-001 clinical trial (TU) and the associated DIAN-Observational (OBS) study. Results indicated that asymptomatic mutation carriers in the TU exhibited persistent practice effects on several key outcomes spanning the entire trial duration. Critically, these practice related improvements were larger on certain tests in the TU relative to matched participants from the OBS study. Our results suggest that the magnitude of practice effects may not be captured by modeling potential endpoints in observational studies where assessments are typically less frequent and drug expectancy effects are absent. Using alternate instrument forms (represented in our study by computerized tasks) may partly mitigate practice effects in clinical trials but incorporating practice effects as outcomes may also be viable. Thus, investigators must carefully consider practice effects (either by minimizing them or modeling them directly) when designing cognitive endpoint AD prevention trials by utilizing trial data with similar assessment frequencies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9244171
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92441712022-07-01 Avoid or Embrace? Practice Effects in Alzheimer’s Disease Prevention Trials Aschenbrenner, Andrew J. Hassenstab, Jason Wang, Guoqiao Li, Yan Xiong, Chengjie McDade, Eric Clifford, David B. Salloway, Stephen Farlow, Martin Yaari, Roy Cheng, Eden Y. J. Holdridge, Karen C. Mummery, Catherine J. Masters, Colin L. Hsiung, Ging-Yuek Surti, Ghulam Day, Gregory S. Weintraub, Sandra Honig, Lawrence S. Galvin, James E. Ringman, John M. Brooks, William S. Fox, Nick C. Snyder, Peter J. Suzuki, Kazushi Shimada, Hiroyuki Gräber, Susanne Bateman, Randall J. Front Aging Neurosci Neuroscience Demonstrating a slowing in the rate of cognitive decline is a common outcome measure in clinical trials in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Selection of cognitive endpoints typically includes modeling candidate outcome measures in the many, richly phenotyped observational cohort studies available. An important part of choosing cognitive endpoints is a consideration of improvements in performance due to repeated cognitive testing (termed “practice effects”). As primary and secondary AD prevention trials are comprised predominantly of cognitively unimpaired participants, practice effects may be substantial and may have considerable impact on detecting cognitive change. The extent to which practice effects in AD prevention trials are similar to those from observational studies and how these potential differences impact trials is unknown. In the current study, we analyzed data from the recently completed DIAN-TU-001 clinical trial (TU) and the associated DIAN-Observational (OBS) study. Results indicated that asymptomatic mutation carriers in the TU exhibited persistent practice effects on several key outcomes spanning the entire trial duration. Critically, these practice related improvements were larger on certain tests in the TU relative to matched participants from the OBS study. Our results suggest that the magnitude of practice effects may not be captured by modeling potential endpoints in observational studies where assessments are typically less frequent and drug expectancy effects are absent. Using alternate instrument forms (represented in our study by computerized tasks) may partly mitigate practice effects in clinical trials but incorporating practice effects as outcomes may also be viable. Thus, investigators must carefully consider practice effects (either by minimizing them or modeling them directly) when designing cognitive endpoint AD prevention trials by utilizing trial data with similar assessment frequencies. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-06-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9244171/ /pubmed/35783127 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2022.883131 Text en Copyright © 2022 Aschenbrenner, Hassenstab, Wang, Li, Xiong, McDade, Clifford, Salloway, Farlow, Yaari, Cheng, Holdridge, Mummery, Masters, Hsiung, Surti, Day, Weintraub, Honig, Galvin, Ringman, Brooks, Fox, Snyder, Suzuki, Shimada, Gräber and Bateman. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Aschenbrenner, Andrew J.
Hassenstab, Jason
Wang, Guoqiao
Li, Yan
Xiong, Chengjie
McDade, Eric
Clifford, David B.
Salloway, Stephen
Farlow, Martin
Yaari, Roy
Cheng, Eden Y. J.
Holdridge, Karen C.
Mummery, Catherine J.
Masters, Colin L.
Hsiung, Ging-Yuek
Surti, Ghulam
Day, Gregory S.
Weintraub, Sandra
Honig, Lawrence S.
Galvin, James E.
Ringman, John M.
Brooks, William S.
Fox, Nick C.
Snyder, Peter J.
Suzuki, Kazushi
Shimada, Hiroyuki
Gräber, Susanne
Bateman, Randall J.
Avoid or Embrace? Practice Effects in Alzheimer’s Disease Prevention Trials
title Avoid or Embrace? Practice Effects in Alzheimer’s Disease Prevention Trials
title_full Avoid or Embrace? Practice Effects in Alzheimer’s Disease Prevention Trials
title_fullStr Avoid or Embrace? Practice Effects in Alzheimer’s Disease Prevention Trials
title_full_unstemmed Avoid or Embrace? Practice Effects in Alzheimer’s Disease Prevention Trials
title_short Avoid or Embrace? Practice Effects in Alzheimer’s Disease Prevention Trials
title_sort avoid or embrace? practice effects in alzheimer’s disease prevention trials
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9244171/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35783127
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2022.883131
work_keys_str_mv AT aschenbrennerandrewj avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT hassenstabjason avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT wangguoqiao avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT liyan avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT xiongchengjie avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT mcdadeeric avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT clifforddavidb avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT sallowaystephen avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT farlowmartin avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT yaariroy avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT chengedenyj avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT holdridgekarenc avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT mummerycatherinej avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT masterscolinl avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT hsiunggingyuek avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT surtighulam avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT daygregorys avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT weintraubsandra avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT honiglawrences avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT galvinjamese avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT ringmanjohnm avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT brookswilliams avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT foxnickc avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT snyderpeterj avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT suzukikazushi avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT shimadahiroyuki avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT grabersusanne avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials
AT batemanrandallj avoidorembracepracticeeffectsinalzheimersdiseasepreventiontrials