Consensus of An International Expert Panel on At-Home Screen for Alzheimer’s Disease

Qun XU, J. Wesson Ashford, PIU CHAN, Shubin CHEN, Jeffrey Cummings, J. Gu Ben, Qihao GUO, Ying HAN, Yingxue HUA, Hua JIN, Nagaendran Kandiah, Haiyan LI, Xiaolei LIU, Xin LIU, Peilin LU, Zhong PEI, Xiaogeng SHI, Kai SUN, Bin TANG, Goerge Vradenburg, Huifang WAGN, Jun WANG, Xiaoming WANG, Yanrui WANG, Yanmei WANG, Yulin WANG, Wenfeng WENG, Meizhe XIN, Yulan ZHANG, Hexin ZHAO, Xianbo ZHOU, Hongzheng WANG

Chinese Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders ›› 2024, Vol. 7 ›› Issue (3) : 176-183.

PDF(936 KB)
Home Journals Chinese Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders
Chinese Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders

Abbreviation (ISO4): Chinese Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders      Editor in chief: Jun WANG

About  /  Aim & scope  /  Editorial board  /  Indexed  /  Contact  / 
PDF(936 KB)
Chinese Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders ›› 2024, Vol. 7 ›› Issue (3) : 176-183. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-5516.2024.03.003
Guide and Consensus

Consensus of An International Expert Panel on At-Home Screen for Alzheimer’s Disease

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Dementia/cognitive impairment in elderly persons is often caused by more than one common age-related brain diseases. Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disease that leads to or contributes to dementia/cognitive impairment. It is the only one of the 10 top deadliest diseases globally that has no curative nor long lasting effective symptom treatments. AD places tremendous burdens on individuals, their families, and the economies of essentially all societies. Early and timely detection and intervention has been increasingly considered to be the best strategy to combat AD. Over the last 3 decades, numerous studies have suggested approaches to reducing the risk of dementia, and up to 40% of dementia cases could be prevented or delayed by addressing risk factors, which are outlined in the 2020 Lancet report on dementia prevention. However, the current global healthcare system is not equipped sufficiently to detect AD early or in a timely fashion. For example, a recent study found that less than 10% of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is diagnosed in primary care setting. Recently, with the full approval of the anti-Amyloid beta (Aβ) antibody drug lecanemab and donanemab for early AD and the publications of ~20-year follow-up studies establishing that modification of risk factors could markedly reduce AD-dementia incidence and increase life span, there is rapidly growing interest in early AD recognition. The Chinese Association of Alzheimer’s Disease (CAAD) recognizes the importance of early and timely detection of AD in an at-home setting and has assembled a global panel of association professionals, clinicians and researchers who are expert in different areas of AD to reach the consensus reported here with the following goals: 1) to provide individuals, family, community, associations and organizations with expert guidance, 2) on the digital tools and available resources for the screen of cognitive impairment/dementia at home and describe a work flow for the next steps for those at risk or suspected of AD, 3) discuss current available or future resources for AD biomarker as at-home screen, and 4) to establish a framework for future improvement and worldwide application if results warrantee such a direction. The experts reviewed the current available evidence, tools, resources and considered the significance of screening for AD at home and the consensus recommendations are reported here.

Key words

Cognitive assessment / Alzheimer’s disease / Cognitive impairment / Dementia / At-home setting / Screening

Cite this article

Download Citations
Qun XU , J. Wesson Ashford , PIU CHAN , et al . Consensus of An International Expert Panel on At-Home Screen for Alzheimer’s Disease[J]. Chinese Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders. 2024, 7(3): 176-183 https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.2096-5516.2024.03.003

References

[1]
Dementia. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dementia Accessed April 30, 2024.
[2]
Jia L, Du Y, Chu L, et al. Prevalence, risk factors, and management of dementia and mild cognitive impairment in adults aged 60 years or older in China: a cross-sectional study[J]. Lancet Public Health, 2020, 5(12):e661-e671.
[3]
Jia J, Wei C, Chen S, et al. The cost of Alzheimer's disease in china and re-estimation of costs worldwide[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2018, 14(4):483-491.
The socioeconomic costs of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in China and its impact on global economic burden remain uncertain.We collected data from 3098 patients with AD in 81 representative centers across China and estimated AD costs for individual patient and total patients in China in 2015. Based on this data, we re-estimated the worldwide costs of AD.The annual socioeconomic cost per patient was US $19,144.36, and total costs were US $167.74 billion in 2015. The annual total costs are predicted to reach US $507.49 billion in 2030 and US $1.89 trillion in 2050. Based on our results, the global estimates of costs for dementia were US $957.56 billion in 2015, and will be US $2.54 trillion in 2030, and US $9.12 trillion in 2050, much more than the predictions by the World Alzheimer Report 2015.China bears a heavy burden of AD costs, which greatly change the estimates of AD cost worldwide.Copyright © 2017 the Alzheimer's Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
[4]
Albert MS, DeKosky ST, Dickson D, et al. The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer′s disease: recommendations from the national institute on aging-Alzheimer′s association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer′s disease[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2011, 7(3): 270-279.
[5]
Jorm AF, Jolley D. The incidence of dementia: a meta-analysis[J]. Neurology, 1998,51:728-733.
[6]
Ziegler-Graham K, Brookmeyer R, Johnson E, et al. Worldwide variation in the doubling time of Alzheimer's disease incidence rates[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2008, 4(5):316-323.
The doubling time is the number of chronological years for the age-specific incidence rate to double in magnitude. Doubling times describe the rate of increase of the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) with advancing age. Estimates of doubling times of AD assist in understanding disease etiology and forecasting future disease prevalence. The objective of this study was to investigate regional and gender differences in the doubling of AD age-specific incidence rates.We identified all studies in the peer review literature that reported age-specific incidence rates for AD. We modeled the logarithm of the incidence rate as a linear function of age. We used both fixed effects models and random effects models to account for interstudy variation.AD incidence rates exponentially increase with increasing age. The overall estimate of the doubling time was 5.5 years. The doubling times from studies performed in North America and Europe were 6.0 and 5.8, respectively; whereas the doubling times in all other parts of the world were 5.0. There was no significant geographic differences in doubling times (P =.3). Although the doubling times were slightly longer for men (6.5 years) than for women (5.4 years), the difference was not significant (P =.3).Doubling times of AD incidence rates are not statistically significantly different among populations throughout the world. The risk of AD grows exponentially with age, doubling approximately every 5 to 6 years. Although the shapes of the incidence curves are similar, there is considerable variation in absolute incidence rates throughout the world. Currently, there are limited epidemiologic data at the oldest ages, and further study is needed to accurately define the incidence curve above age 90.
[7]
Hebert LE, Weuve J, Scherr PA, et al. Alzheimer disease in the United States (2010-2050) estimated using the 2010 census[J]. Neurology,2013, 80(19):1778-1783.
[8]
Corder EH, Saunders AM, Strittmatter WJ, et al. Gene dose of apolipoprotein E type 4 allele and the risk of Alzheimer's disease in late onset families[J]. Science, 1993, 261(5123):921-923.
The apolipoprotein E type 4 allele (APOE-epsilon 4) is genetically associated with the common late onset familial and sporadic forms of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Risk for AD increased from 20% to 90% and mean age at onset decreased from 84 to 68 years with increasing number of APOE-epsilon 4 alleles in 42 families with late onset AD. Thus APOE-epsilon 4 gene dose is a major risk factor for late onset AD and, in these families, homozygosity for APOE-epsilon 4 was virtually sufficient to cause AD by age 80.
[9]
Raber J, Huang Y. Ashford ApoE genotype accounts for the vast majority of AD risk and AD neuropathology[J]. Neurobiology Aging, 2004, 25(5):641-650.
[10]
Bellenguez C, Küçükali F, Jansen IE, et al. New insights into the genetic etiology of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias[J]. Nat Genet, 2022, 54(4):412-436.
Characterization of the genetic landscape of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADD) provides a unique opportunity for a better understanding of the associated pathophysiological processes. We performed a two-stage genome-wide association study totaling 111,326 clinically diagnosed/'proxy' AD cases and 677,663 controls. We found 75 risk loci, of which 42 were new at the time of analysis. Pathway enrichment analyses confirmed the involvement of amyloid/tau pathways and highlighted microglia implication. Gene prioritization in the new loci identified 31 genes that were suggestive of new genetically associated processes, including the tumor necrosis factor alpha pathway through the linear ubiquitin chain assembly complex. We also built a new genetic risk score associated with the risk of future AD/dementia or progression from mild cognitive impairment to AD/dementia. The improvement in prediction led to a 1.6- to 1.9-fold increase in AD risk from the lowest to the highest decile, in addition to effects of age and the APOE ε4 allele.© 2022. The Author(s).
[11]
Huang Z. Evidence that Alzheimer's disease is a disease of competitive synaptic plasticity gone awry[J]. J Alzheimers Dis, 2024, 99(2):447-470.
 Mounting evidence indicates that a physiological function of amyloid-β (Aβ) is to mediate neural activity-dependent homeostatic and competitive synaptic plasticity in the brain. I have previously summarized the lines of evidence supporting this hypothesis and highlighted the similarities between Aβ and anti-microbial peptides in mediating cell/synapse competition. In cell competition, anti-microbial peptides deploy a multitude of mechanisms to ensure both self-protection and competitor elimination. Here I review recent studies showing that similar mechanisms are at play in Aβ-mediated synapse competition and perturbations in these mechanisms underpin Alzheimer's disease (AD). Specifically, I discuss evidence that Aβ and ApoE, two crucial players in AD, co-operate in the regulation of synapse competition. Glial ApoE promotes self-protection by increasing the production of trophic monomeric Aβ and inhibiting its assembly into toxic oligomers. Conversely, Aβ oligomers, once assembled, promote the elimination of competitor synapses via direct toxic activity and amplification of "eat-me" signals promoting the elimination of weak synapses. I further summarize evidence that neuronal ApoE may be part of a gene regulatory network that normally promotes competitive plasticity, explaining the selective vulnerability of ApoE expressing neurons in AD brains. Lastly, I discuss evidence that sleep may be key to Aβ-orchestrated plasticity, in which sleep is not only induced by Aβ but is also required for Aβ-mediated plasticity, underlining the link between sleep and AD. Together, these results strongly argue that AD is a disease of competitive synaptic plasticity gone awry, a novel perspective that may promote AD research.
[12]
Ashford JW. Neuroplasticity: the critical issue for alzheimer's disease and links to obesity and depression[J]. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2023,S1064- 7481(23)00354-8.
[13]
DeKosky ST, Scheff SW. Synapse loss in frontal cortex biopsies in Alzheimer's disease: correlation with cognitive severity[J]. Ann Neurol, 1990, 27(5):457-464.
Ultrastructural studies of biopsied cortical tissue from the right frontal lobe of 8 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) revealed that the number of synapses in lamina III of Brodmann's area 9 was significantly decreased when compared with the number in age-matched control brains (n = 9; postmortem time, less than 13 hours). Further decline in synaptic number was seen in age-matched autopsied AD specimens. In the AD brains there was significant enlargement of the mean apposition length, which correlated with degree of synapse loss; as synapse density declined, synapse size increased. The enlargement of synapses, coupled with the decrease in synaptic number, allowed the total synaptic contact area per unit volume to remain stable in the patients who underwent biopsy. In autopsied subjects who had AD, there was no further enlargement of mean synaptic contact area. There was a significant correlation between synapse counts and scores on the Mini-Mental State examination in the patients who underwent biopsy. Lower mental status scores were associated with greater loss of synapses. Choline acetyltransferase activity was significantly decreased in the biopsied group and declined further in the autopsied specimens of AD. There was no relationship between choline acetyltransferase activity and scores on the Mini-Mental State examination or synapse number. There is evidence of neural plasticity in the AD neuropil; synaptic contact size increased in patients who had biopsy and possibly compensated for the numerical loss of synapses. But by end stage of the disease, the ability of the cortex to compensate was exceeded and both synapse number and synaptic contact area declined.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
[14]
van Dyck CH, Swanson CJ, Aisen P, et al. lecanemab in early Alzheimer's Disease[J]. N Engl J Med, 2023, 388(1):9-21.
[15]
Sims JR, Iwatsubo T, Greenberg SM, et al. S2-donanemab in early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease: additional insights from TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2. 16th clinical trials on Alzheimer’s disease (CTAD) boston, MA (USA) October 24-27, 2023: symposia[J]. J Prev Alzheimers Dis, 2023, 10(1):S6-7.
[16]
Livingston G, Huntley J, Sommerlad A, et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the lancet commission[J]. Lancet, 2020, 396(10248):413-446.
[17]
Dhana K, Franco OH, Ritz EM, et al. Healthy lifestyle and life expectancy with and without Alzheimer's dementia: population based cohort study[J]. BMJ, 2022,377:e068390.
[18]
Alzheimer disease international. World Alzheimer Report 2023[R/OL]. https://www.alzint.org/resource/world-alzheimer-report-2023/ Accessed April 30, 2024
[19]
Anda-Duran I, Hwang PH, Popp ZT, et al. Matching science to reality: how to deploy a participant-driven digital brain health platform[J]. Front Dement, 2023,2:1135451.
[20]
Mattke S, Jun H, Chen E, et al. Expected and diagnosed rates of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in the U.S. Medicare population: observational analysis[J/OL]. Alz Res Therapy 15, 128 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-023-01272-z
[21]
Jansen WJ, Ossenkoppele R, Knol DL, et al. Prevalence of cerebral amyloid pathology in persons without dementia: a meta-analysis[J]. JAMA, 2015, 313(19):1924-1938.
Cerebral amyloid-β aggregation is an early pathological event in Alzheimer disease (AD), starting decades before dementia onset. Estimates of the prevalence of amyloid pathology in persons without dementia are needed to understand the development of AD and to design prevention studies.To use individual participant data meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of amyloid pathology as measured with biomarkers in participants with normal cognition, subjective cognitive impairment (SCI), or mild cognitive impairment (MCI).Relevant biomarker studies identified by searching studies published before April 2015 using the MEDLINE and Web of Science databases and through personal communication with investigators.Studies were included if they provided individual participant data for participants without dementia and used an a priori defined cutoff for amyloid positivity.Individual records were provided for 2914 participants with normal cognition, 697 with SCI, and 3972 with MCI aged 18 to 100 years from 55 studies.Prevalence of amyloid pathology on positron emission tomography or in cerebrospinal fluid according to AD risk factors (age, apolipoprotein E [APOE] genotype, sex, and education) estimated by generalized estimating equations.The prevalence of amyloid pathology increased from age 50 to 90 years from 10% (95% CI, 8%-13%) to 44% (95% CI, 37%-51%) among participants with normal cognition; from 12% (95% CI, 8%-18%) to 43% (95% CI, 32%-55%) among patients with SCI; and from 27% (95% CI, 23%-32%) to 71% (95% CI, 66%-76%) among patients with MCI. APOE-ε4 carriers had 2 to 3 times higher prevalence estimates than noncarriers. The age at which 15% of the participants with normal cognition were amyloid positive was approximately 40 years for APOE ε4ε4 carriers, 50 years for ε2ε4 carriers, 55 years for ε3ε4 carriers, 65 years for ε3ε3 carriers, and 95 years for ε2ε3 carriers. Amyloid positivity was more common in highly educated participants but not associated with sex or biomarker modality.Among persons without dementia, the prevalence of cerebral amyloid pathology as determined by positron emission tomography or cerebrospinal fluid findings was associated with age, APOE genotype, and presence of cognitive impairment. These findings suggest a 20- to 30-year interval between first development of amyloid positivity and onset of dementia.
[22]
Reiman EM, Cummings JL, Langbaum JB, et al. A chance to prevent Alzheimer's disease sooner than you think[J]. The Lancet Neurology, 2024, 23(2): 144-145.
[23]
Kivipelto M, Mangialasche F, Ngandu T, et al. World wide fingers will advance dementia prevention[J]. Lancet Neurol, 2018, 17(1):27.
[24]
Baker LD, Snyder HM, Espeland MA, et al. Pointer study group. study design and methods: U.S. study to protect brain health through lifestyle intervention to reduce risk (U.S. POINTER)[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2024, 20(2):769-782.
[25]
Ellison TS, Cappa SF, Garrett D, et al. Outcome measures for Alzheimer's disease: a global inter-societal delphi consensus[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2023, 19(6):2707-2729.
We aim to provide guidance on outcomes and measures for use in patients with Alzheimer's clinical syndrome.A consensus group of 20 voting members nominated by 10 professional societies, and a non-voting chair, used a Delphi approach and modified GRADE criteria.Consensus was reached on priority outcomes (n = 66), measures (n = 49) and statements (n = 37) across nine domains. A number of outcomes and measurement instruments were ranked for: Cognitive abilities; Functional abilities/dependency; Behavioural and neuropsychiatric symptoms; Patient quality of life (QoL); Caregiver QoL; Healthcare and treatment-related outcomes; Medical investigations; Disease-related life events; and Global outcomes.This work provides indications on the domains and ideal pertinent measurement instruments that clinicians may wish to use to follow patients with cognitive impairment. More work is needed to develop instruments that are more feasible in the context of the constraints of clinical routine.© 2023 The Authors. Alzheimer's & Dementia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Alzheimer's Association.
[26]
Popp Z, Low S, Igwe A, et al. Shifting from active to passive monitoring of Alzheimer disease: the state of the research[J]. J Am Heart Assoc, 2024, 13(2):e031247.
[27]
Ashford JW, Schmitt FA, Bergeron MF, et al. Now is the time to improve cognitive screening and assessment for clinical and research advancement[J]. J Alzheimers Dis, 2022.
[28]
Takata M, Nakashima M, Takehara T, et al. Detection of amyloid beta protein in the urine of Alzheimer's disease patients and healthy individuals[J]. Neurosci Lett, 2008,435:126-130.
[29]
Ghiso J, Calero M, Matsubara E, et al. Alzheimer's soluble amyloid beta is a normal component of human urine[J]. FEBS Lett, 1997,408:105-108.
[30]
Shi M, Sui YT, Peskind ER, et al. Salivary tau species are potential biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease[J]. J Alzheimers Dis, 2011,27:299-305.
[31]
Bermejo-Pareja F, Antequera D, Vargas T, et al. Saliva levels of abeta1-42 as potential biomarker of Alzheimer's disease: a pilot study[J]. BMC Neurol, 2010,10:108.
[32]
van de Sande N, Ramakers I, Visser PJ, et al. Tear biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease screening and diagnosis (the TearAD study): design and rationale of an observational longitudinal multicenter study[J]. BMC Neurol, 2023,23:293.
[33]
Wang Y, Pan F, Xie F, et al. Correlation between urine formaldehyde and cognitive abilities in the clinical spectrum of Alzheimer's disease[J]. Front Aging Neurosci, 2022,14:820385.
[34]
Di Gioia C, Santonico M, Zompanti A, et al. Detecting dementia by saliva analysis: a fingerprinting unobtrusive method based on a fast and cheap sensor system[J]. J Alzheimers Dis, 2023,95:1067-1075.
[35]
Wijesinghe P, Xi J, Cui J, et al. MicroRNAs in tear fluids predict underlying molecular changes associated with Alzheimer's disease[J]. Life Sci Alliance, 2023,6.
[36]
Jiao B, Zhang S, Bei Y, et al. A detection model for cognitive dysfunction based on volatile organic compounds from a large Chinese community cohort[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2023.
[37]
Huber H, Blennow K, Zetterberg H, et al. Biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease and neurodegeneration in dried blood spots-A new collection method for remote settings[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2024, 20(4):2340-2352.
[38]
李涛, 王华丽, 杨渊韩, 等. 中文版《AD8》信度与效度的初步研究[J]. 中华内科杂志, 2012, 51(10):777-780.
[39]
Rykov YG, Patterson MD, Gangwar BA, et al. Predicting cognitive scores from wearable-based digital physiological features using machine learning: data from a clinical trial in mild cognitive impairment[J]. BMC Med, 2024, 22(1):36.
Continuous assessment and remote monitoring of cognitive function in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) enables tracking therapeutic effects and modifying treatment to achieve better clinical outcomes. While standardized neuropsychological tests are inconvenient for this purpose, wearable sensor technology collecting physiological and behavioral data looks promising to provide proxy measures of cognitive function. The objective of this study was to evaluate the predictive ability of digital physiological features, based on sensor data from wrist-worn wearables, in determining neuropsychological test scores in individuals with MCI.We used the dataset collected from a 10-week single-arm clinical trial in older adults (50-70 years old) diagnosed with amnestic MCI (N = 30) who received a digitally delivered multidomain therapeutic intervention. Cognitive performance was assessed before and after the intervention using the Neuropsychological Test Battery (NTB) from which composite scores were calculated (executive function, processing speed, immediate memory, delayed memory and global cognition). The Empatica E4, a wrist-wearable medical-grade device, was used to collect physiological data including blood volume pulse, electrodermal activity, and skin temperature. We processed sensors' data and extracted a range of physiological features. We used interpolated NTB scores for 10-day intervals to test predictability of scores over short periods and to leverage the maximum of wearable data available. In addition, we used individually centered data which represents deviations from personal baselines. Supervised machine learning was used to train models predicting NTB scores from digital physiological features and demographics. Performance was evaluated using "leave-one-subject-out" and "leave-one-interval-out" cross-validation.The final sample included 96 aggregated data intervals from 17 individuals. In total, 106 digital physiological features were extracted. We found that physiological features, especially measures of heart rate variability, correlated most strongly to the executive function compared to other cognitive composites. The model predicted the actual executive function scores with correlation r = 0.69 and intra-individual changes in executive function scores with r = 0.61.Our findings demonstrated that wearable-based physiological measures, primarily HRV, have potential to be used for the continuous assessments of cognitive function in individuals with MCI.© 2024. The Author(s).
[40]
Ding Z, Lee TL, Chan AS, et al. Digital cognitive biomarker for mild cognitive impairments and dementia: a systematic review[J]. J Clin Med, 2022, 11(14):4191.
[41]
Malek-Ahmadi M, Nikkhahmanesh N. Meta-analysis of montreal cognitive assessment diagnostic accuracy in amnestic mild cognitive impairment[J]. Front Psychol, 2024,15:1369766.
[42]
Toniolo S, Zhao S, Scholcz A, et al. Relationship of plasma biomarkers to digital cognitive tests in Alzheimer's disease[J]. Alzheimers Dement (Amst), 2024, 16(2):e12590.
[43]
Martínez-Nicolás I, Llorente TE, Martínez-Sánchez F, et al. Ten years of research on automatic voice and speech analysis of people with alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review article[J]. Front Psychol, 2021,12:620251.
[44]
Rosen AC, Arias JJ, Ashford JW, et al. The advisory group on risk evidence education for dementia: multidisciplinary and open to all[J]. J Alzheimers Dis, 2022, 90(3):953-962.
The brain changes of Alzheimer's disease and other degenerative dementias begin long before cognitive dysfunction develops, and in people with subtle cognitive complaints, clinicians often struggle to predict who will develop dementia. The public increasingly sees benefits to accessing dementia risk evidence (DRE) such as biomarkers, predictive algorithms, and genetic information, particularly as this information moves from research to demonstrated usefulness in guiding diagnosis and clinical management. For example, the knowledge that one has high levels of amyloid in the brain may lead one to seek amyloid reducing medications, plan for disability, or engage in health promoting behaviors to fight cognitive decline. Researchers often hesitate to share DRE data, either because they are insufficiently validated or reliable for use in individuals, or there are concerns about assuring responsible use and ensuring adequate understanding of potential problems when one's biomarker status is known. Concerns include warning people receiving DRE about situations in which they might be compelled to disclose their risk status potentially leading to discrimination or stigma. The Advisory Group on Risk Evidence Education for Dementia (AGREEDementia) welcomes all concerned with how best to share and use DRE. Supporting understanding in clinicians, stakeholders, and people with or at risk for dementia and clearly delineating risks, benefits, and gaps in knowledge is vital. This brief overview describes elements that made this group effective as a model for other health conditions where there is interest in unfettered collaboration to discuss diagnostic uncertainty and the appropriate use and communication of health-related risk information.
[45]
中华医学会神经病学分会痴呆与认知障碍学组. 阿尔茨海默病源性轻度认知障碍诊疗中国专家共识2021[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2022, 55(5): 421-440.
[46]
Jack CR Jr, Andrews JS, Beach TG, et al. Revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of alzheimer's disease: Alzheimer's association workgroup[J]. Alzheimers Dement, 2024.
PDF(936 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/