Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Impact of different diagnostic measures on drug class association with dementia progression risk: A longitudinal prospective cohort study

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

96 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: The Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes (CDRSOB) score is known to be highly indicative of cognitive-functional status and is regularly employed for clinical and research purposes. Objective: Our aim is to determine whether CDRSOB is consistent with clinical diagnosis in evaluating drug class associations with risk of progression to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. Methods: We employed weighted Cox regression analysis on longitudinal NACC data, to identify drug classes associated with disease progression risk, using clinical diagnosis and CDRSOB as the outcome. Results: Aspirin (antiplatelet/NSAID), angiotensin II inhibitors (antihypertensive), and Parkinson's disease medications were significantly associated with reduced risk of progression to MCI/dementia and Alzheimer's disease medications were associated with increased MCI-to-Dementia progression risk with both clinical diagnosis and CDRSOB as the outcome. However, certain drug classes/subcategories, like anxiolytics, antiadrenergics, calcium (Ca2+) channel blockers, and diuretics (antihypertensives) were associated with reduced risk of disease progression, and SSRIs (antidepressant) were associated with increased progression risk only with CDRSOB. Additionally, metformin (antidiabetic medication) was associated with reduced MCI-to-Dementia progression risk only with clinical diagnosis as the outcome. Conclusions: Although the magnitude and direction of the effect were primarily similar for both diagnostic outcomes, we demonstrate that choice of diagnostic measure can influence the significance of risk/protection attributed to drug classes and consequently the conclusion of findings. A consensus must be reached within the research community with respect to the most accurate diagnostic outcome to identify risk and improve reproducibility.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)631-644
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Alzheimer's Disease
Volume100
Issue number2
Early online date15 Jun 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished (in print/issue) - 16 Jul 2024

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 - IOS Press. All rights reserved.

Data Availability Statement

The processed data can be found in results section in the manuscript and Supplementary Tables. R codes for data preparation and analysis are available on GitHub (https://github.com/DamanKaurT/NACC-medication-analysis-Oct23). NACC asks investigators to not share the data with individuals who are not collaborators on the project for which the data was requested. This is partially because they have distinctions between commercial and non-commercial recipients in place due to the option for NACC participants to elect to decline sharing of their data with commercial entities. Additionally, NACC has a data use agreement in place to help prevent misuse of the data. Lastly, this is helpful in their tracking of proposals, publications and data requests. NACC data is available through request to any interested researcher regardless of commerciality. However, commercial requests will only be able to receive a subset of the data due to the consent restrictions mentioned above. At the time of the request submission, investigators will be asked to provide details of the proposal and will need to submit a data use agreement. Requests can be submitted on their website (https://naccdata.org/requesting-data/submit-data-request).
Previously Published Datasets: National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center: Besser et al. 2018, Morris et al. 2006, since 2005, https://naccdata.org/, The NIA Alzheimer’s Disease Research Centers Program.

Funding

This work was supported by the European Union’s INTERREG VA Programme, managed by the Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB (Centre for Personalised Medicine, IVA 5036)), with additional support by the Northern Ireland Functional Brain Mapping Project Facility (1303/101154803), funded by invest Northern Ireland and the University of Ulster (K.W.-L.), Alzheimer’s Research UK (ARUK) NI Pump Priming (M.B.,S.T.,K.W.-L.,P.L.M.), Ulster University Research Challenge Fund (M.B.,S.T.,K.W.-L.,M.B.), and the Dr George Moore Endowment for Data Science at Ulster University (M.B.). The funders had no role in study design, data collection, and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

FundersFunder number
Invest Northern Ireland
Ulster University Research Challenge Fund
European Commission
National Institutes of HealthP30 AG028383, P30 AG013846, P30 AG008017, P30 AG010133, P50 AG005146, P50 AG033514, P50 AG005142, P50 AG005681, P50 AG047366, P50 AG047266, P30 AG019610, P30AG053760, P50 AG023501, P30 AG008051, P30 AG010129, P30 AG013854, P50 AG005138, P50 AG008702, P30 AG010124, P50 AG005134, P30 AG012300, P50 AG005136, P50 AG025688, P50 AG047270, U01 AG016976, P30 AG035982, P30 AG010161, P50 AG005131, P50 AG005133, P30 AG049638, P50 AG016574, P50 AG016573
1303/101154803

    UN SDGs

    This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

    1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
      SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

    Keywords

    • mild Cognitive Impairment
    • dementia
    • Alzheimer's disease
    • risk factors
    • CDRSOB
    • diagnosis
    • antidepressants
    • anticoagulants
    • antihypertensives
    • metformin
    • mild cognitive impairment
    • Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use
    • Prospective Studies
    • Humans
    • Male
    • Cognitive Dysfunction/diagnosis
    • Mental Status and Dementia Tests
    • Dementia/diagnosis
    • Disease Progression
    • Aged, 80 and over
    • Female
    • Aged
    • Longitudinal Studies
    • Cohort Studies

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Impact of different diagnostic measures on drug class association with dementia progression risk: A longitudinal prospective cohort study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this