Interpreting biomarker results in individual patients with mild cognitive impairment to estimate prognosis and optimize decision making

(1)

Interpreting biomarker results in individual patients with mild cognitive impairment to estimate prognosis and optimize decision making

van Maurik, I.S.

2020

document version

Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Link to publication in VU Research Portal

citation for published version (APA)

van Maurik, I. S. (2020). Interpreting biomarker results in individual patients with mild cognitive impairment to estimate prognosis and optimize decision making.

General rights

Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.

• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?

Take down policy

If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

E-mail address:

vuresearchportal.ub@vu.nl

Download date: 11. Oct. 2021

(2)

542338-L-bw-Maurik 542338-L-bw-Maurik 542338-L-bw-Maurik 542338-L-bw-Maurik Processed on: 19-3-2020 Processed on: 19-3-2020 Processed on: 19-3-2020

Processed on: 19-3-2020 PDF page: 253PDF page: 253PDF page: 253PDF page: 253 IngridvanMaurik_BNW.indd 253

IngridvanMaurik_BNW.indd 253 19/03/2020 15:50:0119/03/2020 15:50:01

(3)

Processed on: 19-3-2020 PDF page: 254PDF page: 254PDF page: 254PDF page: 254

254

IngridvanMaurik_BNW.indd 254

(4)

255 In

with a focus on MCI. The project was structured into interconnected sub studies using

5

(5)

that allow clinicians to interpret biomarker results on an individual level.

1 In we constructed biomarker-

2

In we took a similar approach to construct

and clinical assessment. In

(6)

on the demographic model (age and MMSE) to either a high or a low risk. This study we developed in and

3-7

We therefore developed in

diagnosis or prognosis. In

5

(7)

258

In ¹¹

(PCC) which is the probability that the diagnosis suggested by the tool is correct. We

In

showed that clinicians’ current approaches may not match with those needs.

in earlier stages of the disease. This has posed novel challenges for the clinician during

we describe the development

(8)

considered to be clear and user-friendly. ADappt supports clinicians in a memory clinic

allows control over all predictors and outcomes to be measured.¹² Such a design has

5

(9)

Cohort was quite high.

random subset of records.¹⁵

As the models in our studies were primarily designed to evaluate the use of AD-

evaluated AD-biomarkers.

(10)

analysis and to ease the use for clinicians.¹⁷

tau should always be interpreted alongside each other.

variables capturing the heterogeneity of the disease and to predict progression asks for

recently published.

footprint.

25

5

(11)

approach requires a smaller number of variables to be available and reduces the risk

biomarker results at hand. As such we show proof of principle that personalized prognoses are feasible in early stages of AD.

1

In

27

AD

bridging formulas from one method to another. The inclusion of these formulas in

(12)

in

Variability in this

the memory clinic seeking help and their complaints might be more severe than in clinician. In

But for support tools

5

(13)

Processed on: 19-3-2020 PDF page: 264PDF page: 264PDF page: 264PDF page: 264 50

found in

an individualized prognosis.

and

).¹¹

55-57

(14)

37

are intended for research purposes.² ADappt (

5

(15)

caregivers to facilitate them to engage in shared decision making and to aid them in managing their own health care trajectory.

In this tests

Studies

management.

A randomized controlled trial would be the

(16)

Processed on: 19-3-2020 PDF page: 267PDF page: 267PDF page: 267PDF page: 267 70

modifying therapies as such therapies are likely to intercept early in the disease before symptoms occur.^71-73

care for AD.

5

(17)

robustness across different cohorts and accommodate different measurement

and showed that a biomarker-based individually tailored approach is feasible in this

and found that clinicians do this only in very generic terms and do not seem to use the be done. An important part of that work is to develop tools to support clinicians in the

(18)

Toward a biological definition of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement.

Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis.

4. Hansson O, Zetterberg H, Buchhave P, et al. Association between CSF biomarkers and incipient Alzheimer’s

543.

et al. Clinical validity of cerebrospinal as biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease development framework. Neurobiol

An informative animation video for patients and caregivers. Alzheimers

et al. Detailed comparison of amyloid early Alzheimer disease. Neurology.

of lumbar puncture in memory clinics:

Results of the multicenter lumbar puncture feasibility study. Alzheimers

prognostic research: what, why, and

research: the Amsterdam Dementia

Amsterdam Dementia Cohort:

15. Groenwold RH, White IR, Donders AR, research: when and when not to use the

5

(19)

18. Altomare D, de Wilde A, Ossenkoppele R, et al. Applying the ATN scheme in a memory clinic population:

FH, et al. The cerebrospinal fluid what does it mean? Alzheimers Dement.

20. Jack CR, Jr., Wiste HJ, Weigand SD, et

21. Jansen WJ, Ossenkoppele R, Knol DL, et al. Prevalence of cerebral amyloid pathology in persons without

of disease progression. Alzheimers

Alzheimer’s disease dementia based imaging data. Alzheimers Dement.

The dawn of robust individualised risk

of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis

al. Ways toward an early diagnosis in Alzheimer’s disease: the Alzheimer’s

educational attainment and amyloid deposition across the spectrum from normal cognition to dementia:

and compensation. Neurobiol Aging.

30. Kornhuber J, Schmidtke K, Frolich L, of dementia and mild cognitive impairment: design and cohort baseline Competence Network. Dement Geriatr 31. Lovestone S, Francis P, Kloszewska I, biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease. Ann

regression, neural networks, support vector machines, classification trees

(20)

in prodromal Alzheimer’s disease. A

Cognitive Impairment: Amyloidosis

P, et al. Longitudinal changes of CSF biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease. J

et al. Development of screening guidelines and clinical criteria for

Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers in a

CSF biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease predict clinical progression: A study of fully automated immunoassays in

Prevalence and prognosis of Alzheimer’s

characterization and outcome. Arch

impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the

guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease.

et al. Alzheimer’s disease. Lancet.

43. Visser PJ, Verhey F, Knol DL, et al.

Prevalence and prognostic value of CSF markers of Alzheimer’s disease

et al. A conceptual framework for in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease.

852.

decline criteria in research studies.

of incident Alzheimer’s disease and

chemotherapy effectiveness when

breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat.

5

(21)

48. Westeneng HJ, Debray TPA, Visser with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis:

development and validation of a

2200.

memory clinics. Alzheimers Res Ther.

FH, et al. Patients’ and caregivers’

views on conversations and shared

322.

testing for Alzheimer’s disease: The

Diagnostic dilemmas in Alzheimer’s disease: Room for shared decision

al. Patients’ and carers’ views on communication and information provision when undergoing assessments in memory services. J Health Serv Res

55. Grill JD, Apostolova LG, Bullain S, et al. Communicating mild cognitive impairment diagnoses with and without amyloid imaging. Alzheimers Res Ther.

JC. Shared decision making: Concepts,

diagnostic testing: supporting medicine and shared decision making.

powers of survival models using Harrell’s 358.

W, et al. Assessment of the appropriate unselected memory clinic cohort: The

Cognitive Impairment or Dementia.

and design. Alzheimers Dement.

patient outcomes and pathways in

(22)

modeling of Alzheimer’s disease 125.

Disability Assessment Schedule Institutionalization of Patients With

in Alzheimer’s Disease: Data from the Impact of Cholinergic Treatment USe

Registry. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry.

A, Zhong K. Alzheimer’s disease drug

risk monitoring versus control to prevent

5

(23)