Search

Objectives: Preliminary evidence suggested that doxycycline and rifampin might stop or slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD). We carried out a randomized trial to confirm or refute these findings., Methods: A multicenter, blinded, randomized, 2 × 2 factorial controlled trial, set at 14 geriatric outpatient clinics in Canada. Four hundred and six patients with mild to moderate AD (standardized mini mental state examination (SMMSE) score 14-26) participated. The intervention was 12 months' treatment with doxycycline 100 mg twice daily + rifampin 300 mg daily or doxycycline 100 mg twice daily + placebo-rifampin daily or rifampin 300 mg daily + placebo-doxycycline twice daily or placebo-doxycycline twice daily + placebo-rifampin daily. Coprimary outcomes were the Standardized Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (SADAS-cog) and the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale-Sum of the Boxes (CDR-SB). Secondary outcomes were the SMMSE, Quick mild cognitive impairment screen, Geriatric Depression Scale, Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia, activities of daily living (Lawton Scale), and the Dysfunctional Behavior Rating Instrument frequency and reaction subscales., Results: There was a significant deterioration in SADAS-cog over time with both rifampin and doxycycline in comparison with placebo. When the two were used together, there was no statistically significant decline/deterioration in comparison with placebo (n = 305). For the CDR-SB, there were no significant effects of either rifampin or doxycycline. Secondary outcome results followed similar patterns., Conclusion: Twelve months' treatment with doxycycline or rifampin, alone or in combination, has no beneficial effects on cognition or function in AD., (Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Cognitive screening instruments are either too long for routine clinical use or not sensitive to distinguish mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from normal cognition (NC) or dementia., Objective: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the AB Cognitive Screen (ABCS) and its subtests with a view to improving its ability to differentiate between dementia, MCI and NC. The influence of age and education on sensitivity and specificity is also examined., Design: Cross-sectional study., Methods: Participants with dementia and MCI were recruited from those presenting to four specialty geriatric clinics in southern Ontario. Participants with NC were recruited from the family and friends of patients. A comprehensive geriatric assessment was done including ABCS, SMMSE and 15 point Geriatric Depression Scale. Analysis of variance and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves compared test scores. SMMSE scores were also analysed for comparison purposes., Results: Three hundred and two participants had dementia, 166 had MCI and 174 had NC. ABCS total scores were significantly different between NC and MCI (mean difference 7.1, 1.8-12.5 CI, p = 0.000) while SMMSE scores were not (mean difference 0.5, -0.7-1.7, p < 0.628). Of individual ABCS subtests, verbal fluency and delayed recall were most sensitive to differences between NC and MCI. ROC curve analysis, which presents sensitivity and specificity, showed verbal fluency was better than delayed recall in distinguishing between NC and MCI, among participants 75 years of age or older., Conclusion: The AB Cognitive Screen (ABCS) can be administered in 3-5 min. The SMMSE and ABCS total and subtests significantly distinguished between dementia and MCI or NC. Verbal fluency and delayed recall were best at distinguishing between MCI and NC. The analysis illustrates how each subtest contributes to the sensitivity of the ABCS and suggests ways that sensitivity might be improved., ((c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)