WMH differentially predict dementia by region and severity. Our findings suggest that PWMH may play an independent role in the pathogenesis of dementia, especially in AD.

There were no significant differences in tolerability and safety between the treatment groups. The combination therapy of memantine plus rivastigmine patch did not show an advantage over rivastigmine patch monotherapy on efficacy analyses. The sample size for comparing tolerability may have been too small to detect a difference of efficacy between the two groups.

Background: We examined the efficacy of group-based cognitive intervention (GCI) and home-based cognitive intervention (HCI) in amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and intervention effects on serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). Methods: In this randomized and rater-blinded trial, 293 patients with aMCI from 18 nationwide hospitals were randomized: 96 to the GCI group, 98 to the HCI group and 99 to the control group. For 12 weeks, subjects receiving GCI participated twice per week in group sessions led by trained instructors, and those receiving HCI completed homework materials 5 days per week. They were assessed at baseline, postintervention (PI) and at the 6-month follow-up after the intervention. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline to PI in the modified Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog). Results: In comparison to the controls (a 0.8-point decrease), the subjects receiving GCI (a 2.3-point decrease, p = 0.01) or HCI (a 2.5-point decrease, p = 0.02) showed significant improvements in the modified ADAS-Cog at PI, respectively. By the 6-month follow-up, those receiving GCI or HCI had better scores in the modified ADAS-Cog than the controls. The changes in BDNF levels significantly correlated with the changes in the modified ADAS-Cog in the GCI (r = -0.29, p = 0.02 at PI) and HCI (r = -0.27, p = 0.03 at 6-month follow-up) groups, respectively. Conclusions: The GCI and HCI resulted in cognitive improvements in aMCI. An enhanced brain plasticity may be a component of the mechanism underpinning the cognitive improvements associated with the cognitive interventions.

Objectives:The present study examined self-reports and informant reports of cognitive function and discrepancies between the two reporting methods in healthy controls (HC), subjective cognitive decline (SCD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and very mild Alzheimer disease (AD) using three questionnaires. Methods:The study included a total of 300 individuals (mean age: 74.4 ± 5.7 y), including 130 HC, 70 SCD, 51 MCI, and 49 very mild AD patients. Self-ratings and informant ratings of cognitive function were assessed using the Korean Dementia Screening Questionnaire-Cognition (KDSQ-C), AD8, and Subjective Memory Complaints Questionnaire (SMCQ). Awareness of cognitive functioning was measured on the basis of the discrepancy scores between self-reports and informant reports.Results: Group comparisons on questionnaire scores adjusting for age, education, and depressive symptoms showed that self-reports were lowest in HC than other

BackgroundNeuropsychological tests (NPTs) are important tools for informing diagnoses of cognitive impairment (CI). However, interpreting NPTs requires specialists and is thus time-consuming. To streamline the application of NPTs in clinical settings, we developed and evaluated the accuracy of a machine learning algorithm using multi-center NPT data.MethodsMulti-center data were obtained from 14,926 formal neuropsychological assessments (Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery), which were classified into normal cognition (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease dementia (ADD). We trained a machine learning model with artificial neural network algorithm using TensorFlow (https://www.tensorflow.org) to distinguish cognitive state with the 46-variable data and measured prediction accuracies from 10 randomly selected datasets. The features of the NPT were listed in order of their contribution to the outcome using Recursive Feature Elimination.ResultsThe ten times mean accuracies of identifying CI (MCI and ADD) achieved by 96.66 ± 0.52% of the balanced dataset and 97.23 ± 0.32% of the clinic-based dataset, and the accuracies for predicting cognitive states (NC, MCI or ADD) were 95.49 ± 0.53 and 96.34 ± 1.03%. The sensitivity to the detection CI and MCI in the balanced dataset were 96.0 and 96.0%, and the specificity were 96.8 and 97.4%, respectively. The ‘time orientation’ and ‘3-word recall’ score of MMSE were highly ranked features in predicting CI and cognitive state. The twelve features reduced from 46 variable of NPTs with age and education had contributed to more than 90% accuracy in predicting cognitive impairment.ConclusionsThe machine learning algorithm for NPTs has suggested potential use as a reference in differentiating cognitive impairment in the clinical setting.

Background: Amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) is regarded as a prodromal stage of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Given that patients with early-onset AD (EOAD) and with late-onset AD (LOAD) are known to have different clinical courses, symptoms and neuroimaging findings, early-onset (EOMCI) and late-onset aMCI (LOMCI) might be expected to have similar differences as EOAD versus LOAD. Methods: Our study involving 425 patients with aMCI (124 EOMCI, 301 LOMCI), who were followed for around 1.5 years, and 958 normal control subjects (NC) investigated neuropsychological characteristics and prediction of progression to AD in patients with EOMCI versus LOMCI. Neuropsychological scores were compared between EOMCI, LOMCI and NC with analyses of covariance controlling age, gender, education and disease duration. The risk of AD conversion was evaluated by Cox proportional hazard analyses. Results: The baseline neuropsychological performances were comparable between EOMCI and LOMCI. Visuospatial memory for EOMCI and verbal memory scores for LOMCI were significant predictors of AD conversion. Conclusion: Our study indicates that EOMCI with visuospatial memory impairment, which implies underlying right predominant pathology, and LOMCI with poor verbal memory, which suggests underlying left predominant pathology, are individual conditions at an increased risk of conversion to AD.

The plasma Aβ40/Aβ42 ratio had moderate validity for the discrimination of sEOAD patients from age-matched controls.

Background Korea has a periodic general health check-up program that uses the Korean Dementia Screening Questionnaire-Cognition (KDSQ-C) as a cognitive dysfunction screening tool. The Alzheimer Disease 8 (AD8) and Subjective Memory Complaints Questionnaire (SMCQ) are also used in clinical practice. We compared the diagnostic ability of these screening questionnaires for cognitive impairment when completed by participants and their caregivers. Hence, we aimed to evaluate whether the SMCQ or AD8 is superior to the KDSQ-C and can be used as its replacement. Methods A total of 420 participants over 65 years and their informants were recruited from 11 hospitals for this study. The patients were grouped into normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia subgroups. The KDSQ-C, AD8, and SMCQ were completed separately by participants and their informants. Results A receiver operating characteristic analysis of questionnaire scores completed by participants showed that the areas under the curve (AUCs) for the KDSQ-C, AD8, and SMCQ for diagnosing dementia were 0.75, 0.8, and 0.73, respectively. Regarding informant-completed questionnaires, the AD8 (AUC of 0.93), KDSQ-C (AUC of 0.92), and SMCQ (AUC of 0.92) showed good discriminability for dementia, with no differences in discriminability between the questionnaires. Conclusion When an informant-report is possible, we recommend that the KDSQ-C continues to be used in national medical check-ups as its discriminability for dementia is not different from that of the AD8 or SMCQ. Moreover, consistent data collection using the same questionnaire is important. When an informant is not available, either the KDSQ-C or AD8 may be used. However, in the cases of patient-reports, discriminability is lower than that for informant-completed questionnaires.