5 results on '"on behalf of the LipiDiDiet clinical study group"'
Search Results
2. Research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s disease: findings from the LipiDiDiet randomized controlled trial
- Author
-
Anna Rosenberg, Alina Solomon, Hilkka Soininen, Pieter Jelle Visser, Kaj Blennow, Tobias Hartmann, Miia Kivipelto, and on behalf of the LipiDiDiet clinical study group
- Subjects
Alzheimer’s disease ,Prodromal Alzheimer’s disease ,Randomized controlled trial ,Prevention ,Disease progression ,Research criteria ,Neurosciences. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry ,RC321-571 ,Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system ,RC346-429 - Abstract
Abstract Background To explore the utility of the International Working Group (IWG)-1 criteria in recruitment for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) clinical trials, we applied the more recently proposed research diagnostic criteria to individuals enrolled in a randomized controlled prevention trial (RCT) and assessed their disease progression. Methods The multinational LipiDiDiet RCT targeted 311 individuals with IWG-1 defined prodromal AD. Based on centrally analyzed baseline biomarkers, participants were classified according to the IWG-2 and National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer’s Association (NIA-AA) 2011 and 2018 criteria. Linear mixed models were used to investigate the 2-year change in cognitive and functional performance (Neuropsychological Test Battery NTB Z scores, Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes CDR-SB) (criteria × time interactions; baseline score, randomization group, sex, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and age also included in the models). Cox models adjusted for randomization group, MMSE, sex, age, and study site were used to investigate the risk of progression to dementia over 2 years. Results In total, 88%, 86%, and 69% of participants had abnormal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) β-amyloid, total tau, and phosphorylated tau, respectively; 64% had an A+T+N+ profile (CSF available for N = 107). Cognitive-functional decline appeared to be more pronounced in the IWG-2 prodromal AD, NIA-AA 2011 high and intermediate AD likelihood, and NIA-AA 2018 AD groups, but few significant differences were observed between the groups within each set of criteria. Hazard ratio (95% CI) for dementia was 4.6 (1.6–13.7) for IWG-2 prodromal AD (reference group no prodromal AD), 7.4 (1.0–54.7) for NIA-AA 2011 high AD likelihood (reference group suspected non-AD pathology SNAP), and 9.4 (1.2–72.7) for NIA-AA 2018 AD (reference group non-Alzheimer’s pathologic change). Compared with the NIA-AA 2011 high AD likelihood group (abnormal β-amyloid and neuronal injury markers), disease progression was similar in the intermediate AD likelihood group (medial temporal lobe atrophy; no CSF available). Conclusions Despite being less restrictive than the other criteria, the IWG-1 criteria reliably identified individuals with AD pathology. More pragmatic and easily applicable selection criteria might be preferred due to feasibility in certain situations, e.g., in multidomain prevention trials that do not specifically target β-amyloid/tau pathologies. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register, NL1620 . Registered on 9 March 2009
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. A competing risk joint model for dealing with different types of missing data in an intervention trial in prodromal Alzheimer’s disease
- Author
-
Floor M. van Oudenhoven, Sophie H. N. Swinkels, Hilkka Soininen, Miia Kivipelto, Tobias Hartmann, Dimitris Rizopoulos, and on behalf of the LipiDiDiet clinical study group
- Subjects
Alzheimer’s disease ,Prodromal ,Joint model ,Fortasyn ,Randomized controlled trial ,Dropout ,Neurosciences. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry ,RC321-571 ,Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system ,RC346-429 - Abstract
Abstract Background Missing data can complicate the interpretability of a clinical trial, especially if the proportion is substantial and if there are different, potentially outcome-dependent causes. Methods We aimed to obtain unbiased estimates, in the presence of a high level of missing data, for the intervention effects in a prodromal Alzheimer’s disease trial: the LipiDiDiet study. We used a competing risk joint model that can simultaneously model each patient’s longitudinal outcome trajectory in combination with the timing and type of missingness. Results Using the competing risk joint model, we were able to provide unbiased estimates of the intervention effects in the presence of the different types of missingness. For the LipiDiDiet study, the intervention effects remained statistically significant after this correction for the timing and type of missingness. Conclusion Missing data is a common problem in (Alzheimer) clinical trials. It is important to realize that statistical techniques make specific assumptions about the missing data mechanisms. When there are different missing data sources, a competing risk joint model is a powerful method because it can explicitly model the association between the longitudinal data and each type of missingness. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register, NTR1705 . Registered on 9 March 2009
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. A competing risk joint model for dealing with different types of missing data in an intervention trial in prodromal Alzheimer’s disease
- Author
-
van Oudenhoven, Floor M., Swinkels, Sophie H. N., Soininen, Hilkka, Kivipelto, Miia, Hartmann, Tobias, Rizopoulos, Dimitris, on behalf of the LipiDiDiet clinical study group, Epidemiology, Neurology, and Amsterdam Neuroscience - Neurodegeneration
- Subjects
Cognitive Neuroscience ,Disease ,Fortasyn ,lcsh:RC346-429 ,law.invention ,lcsh:RC321-571 ,Randomized controlled trial ,Alzheimer Disease ,law ,Joint model ,Econometrics ,Humans ,lcsh:Neurosciences. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry ,Dropout (neural networks) ,lcsh:Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system ,Interpretability ,Clinical Trials as Topic ,Research ,Dropout ,Alzheimer's disease ,Missing data ,Outcome (probability) ,Data Accuracy ,Clinical trial ,Dietary intervention ,Neurology ,Research Design ,Prodromal ,Neurology (clinical) ,Psychology ,Alzheimer’s disease ,Geriatric psychiatry - Abstract
Background Missing data can complicate the interpretability of a clinical trial, especially if the proportion is substantial and if there are different, potentially outcome-dependent causes. Methods We aimed to obtain unbiased estimates, in the presence of a high level of missing data, for the intervention effects in a prodromal Alzheimer’s disease trial: the LipiDiDiet study. We used a competing risk joint model that can simultaneously model each patient’s longitudinal outcome trajectory in combination with the timing and type of missingness. Results Using the competing risk joint model, we were able to provide unbiased estimates of the intervention effects in the presence of the different types of missingness. For the LipiDiDiet study, the intervention effects remained statistically significant after this correction for the timing and type of missingness. Conclusion Missing data is a common problem in (Alzheimer) clinical trials. It is important to realize that statistical techniques make specific assumptions about the missing data mechanisms. When there are different missing data sources, a competing risk joint model is a powerful method because it can explicitly model the association between the longitudinal data and each type of missingness. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register, NTR1705. Registered on 9 March 2009
- Published
- 2021
5. Research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease: findings from the LipiDiDiet randomized controlled trial
- Author
-
Rosenberg, Anna, Solomon, Alina, Soininen, Hilkka, Visser, Pieter Jelle, Blennow, Kaj, Hartmann, Tobias, Kivipelto, Miia, and on behalf of the LipiDiDiet clinical study group
- Subjects
Prodromal Alzheimer’s disease ,Disease progression ,Amyloid beta-Peptides ,Research ,Prevention ,tau Proteins ,Alzheimer's disease ,Early diagnosis ,lcsh:RC346-429 ,Peptide Fragments ,lcsh:RC321-571 ,Prodromal Alzheimer's disease ,Cerebrospinal fluid ,Alzheimer Disease ,Randomized controlled trial ,Humans ,Cognitive Dysfunction ,lcsh:Neurosciences. Biological psychiatry. Neuropsychiatry ,Alzheimer’s disease ,Research criteria ,lcsh:Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system ,Biomarkers ,Netherlands - Abstract
Background: To explore the utility of the International Working Group (IWG)-1 criteria in recruitment for Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials, we applied the more recently proposed research diagnostic criteria to individuals enrolled in a randomized controlled prevention trial (RCT) and assessed their disease progression.Methods: The multinational LipiDiDiet RCT targeted 311 individuals with IWG-1 defined prodromal AD. Based on centrally analyzed baseline biomarkers, participants were classified according to the IWG-2 and National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA) 2011 and 2018 criteria. Linear mixed models were used to investigate the 2-year change in cognitive and functional performance (Neuropsychological Test Battery NTB Z scores, Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes CDR-SB) (criteria × time interactions; baseline score, randomization group, sex, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and age also included in the models). Cox models adjusted for randomization group, MMSE, sex, age, and study site were used to investigate the risk of progression to dementia over 2 years.Results: In total, 88%, 86%, and 69% of participants had abnormal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) β-amyloid, total tau, and phosphorylated tau, respectively; 64% had an A+T+N+ profile (CSF available for N = 107). Cognitive-functional decline appeared to be more pronounced in the IWG-2 prodromal AD, NIA-AA 2011 high and intermediate AD likelihood, and NIA-AA 2018 AD groups, but few significant differences were observed between the groups within each set of criteria. Hazard ratio (95% CI) for dementia was 4.6 (1.6–13.7) for IWG-2 prodromal AD (reference group no prodromal AD), 7.4 (1.0–54.7) for NIA-AA 2011 high AD likelihood (reference group suspected non-AD pathology SNAP), and 9.4 (1.2–72.7) for NIA-AA 2018 AD (reference group non-Alzheimer's pathologic change). Compared with the NIA-AA 2011 high AD likelihood group (abnormal β-amyloid and neuronal injury markers), disease progression was similar in the intermediate AD likelihood group (medial temporal lobe atrophy; no CSF available).Conclusions: Despite being less restrictive than the other criteria, the IWG-1 criteria reliably identified individuals with AD pathology. More pragmatic and easily applicable selection criteria might be preferred due to feasibility in certain situations, e.g., in multidomain prevention trials that do not specifically target β-amyloid/tau pathologies.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NL1620. Registered on 9 March 2009
- Published
- 2021
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.