Weintraub D.,University of Pennsylvania |
Porsteinsson A.P.,University of Rochester |
Rosenberg P.B.,Johns Hopkins University |
Pollock B.G.,University of Toronto |
And 10 more authors.
American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry | Year: 2015
Objective Agitation is a common and significant problem in Alzheimer disease (AD). In the recent Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's Disease (CitAD) study, citalopram was efficacious for the treatment of AD agitation. Here we examined the time course and predictors of response to treatment. Methods Response in CitAD was defined as a modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) score of 1 or 2 or a Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A) score reduction ≥ 50% from baseline. "Stable early response" was defined as meeting the aforementioned criteria at both weeks 3 and 9, "late response" was response at week 9 but not at week 3, and "unstable response" was response at week 3 but not at week 9. Results In the primary analyses, citalopram was superior to placebo on both the CGIC and the NBRS-A response measures. Little between-group differences were found in response rates in the first 3 weeks of the study (21% versus 19% on the CGIC). Citalopram patients were more likely than placebo patients to be a late responder (18% versus 8% on CGIC, Fisher's exact p = 0.09; 31% versus 15% on NBRS-A, Fisher's exact p = 0.02). Approximately half of citalopram responders (45%-56%) at end of study achieved response later in the study compared with 30%-44% of placebo responders. Conclusion Treatment with citalopram for agitation in AD needs to be at least 9 weeks in duration to allow sufficient time for full response. Study duration is an important factor to consider in the design of clinical trials for agitation in AD. © 2015 American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry.
Vanderweyen D.,Medical University of South Carolina |
Munsell B.C.,College of Charleston |
Mintzer J.E.,Clinical Biotechnology Research Institute |
Mintzer O.,Ralph hnson Va Medical Center |
And 4 more authors.
Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) | Year: 2015
The objective of this study is to determine if patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) have similar pathological changes in brain network organization as patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) using functional connectome data reconstructed from resting-state fMRI (rsfMRI). To achieve our objective a novel machine learning technique is proposed that uses a top-down reverse engineering approach to identify abnormal network alterations in functional connectome data that are common to patients with AD and TBI. In general, if the proposed machine learning approach classifies a TBI connectome as AD, then this suggests a common network pathology exists in the connectomes of AD and TBI. The advantage of proposed machine learning technique is two-fold: 1) existing longitudinal TBI imaging data is not required, and 2) the potential risk of a TBI patient converting to AD later in life does not require a lengthy and potentially expensive longitudinal imaging study. Experiments are provided that show the AD pathology learned by our connectome-based machine learning technique is able to correctly identify TBI patients with 80% accuracy. In summary, this research may lead to early interventions that can dramatically increase the quality of life for TBI patients who may convert to AD. © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015.
Porsteinsson A.P.,University of Rochester |
Pollock B.G.,University of Toronto |
Devanand D.P.,New York State Psychiatric Institute |
Devanand D.P.,Columbia University |
And 11 more authors.
JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association | Year: 2014
IMPORTANCE: Agitation is common, persistent, and associated with adverse consequences for patients with Alzheimer disease. Pharmacological treatment options, including antipsychotics are not satisfactory. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of citalopram for agitation in patients with Alzheimer disease. Key secondary objectives examined effects of citalopram on function, caregiver distress, safety, cognitive safety, and tolerability. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer Disease Study (CitAD) was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial that enrolled 186 patients with probable Alzheimer disease and clinically significant agitation from 8 academic centers in the United States and Canada from August 2009 to January 2013. INTERVENTIONS: Participants (n = 186) were randomized to receive a psychosocial intervention plus either citalopram (n = 94) or placebo (n = 92) for 9 weeks. Dosage began at 10 mg per day with planned titration to 30 mg per day over 3 weeks based on response and tolerability. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were based on scores from the 18-point Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A) and the modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC). Other outcomes were based on scores from the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), ability to complete activities of daily living (ADLs), caregiver distress, cognitive safety (based on scores from the 30-point Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE]), and adverse events. RESULTS: Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement compared with those who received placebo on both primary outcome measures. The NBRS-A estimated treatment difference at week 9 (citalopram minus placebo) was -0.93 (95% CI, -1.80 to -0.06), P = .04. Results from the mADCS-CGIC showed 40% of citalopram participants having moderate or marked improvement from baseline compared with 26% of placebo recipients, with estimated treatment effect (odds ratio [OR] of being at or better than a given CGIC category) of 2.13 (95% CI, 1.23-3.69), P = .01. Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement on the CMAI, total NPI, and caregiver distress scores but not on the NPI agitation subscale, ADLs, or in less use of rescue lorazepam. Worsening of cognition (-1.05 points; 95% CI, -1.97 to -0.13; P = .03) and QT interval prolongation (18.1 ms; 95% CI, 6.1-30.1; P = .01) were seen in the citalopram group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with probable Alzheimer disease and agitation who were receiving psychosocial intervention, the addition of citalopram compared with placebo significantly reduced agitation and caregiver distress; however, cognitive and cardiac adverse effects of citalopram may limit its practical application at the dosage of 30 mg per day. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00898807. Copyright 2014 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Cummings J.,ClevelandClinic Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health |
Mintzer J.,Clinical Biotechnology Research Institute |
Brodaty H.,University of New South Wales |
Sano M.,Mount Sinai School of Medicine |
And 14 more authors.
International Psychogeriatrics | Year: 2015
Background: Agitation is common across neuropsychiatric disorders and contributes to disability, institutionalization, and diminished quality of life for patients and their caregivers. There is no consensus definition of agitation and no widespread agreement on what elements should be included in the syndrome. The International Psychogeriatric Association formed an Agitation Definition Work Group (ADWG) to develop a provisional consensus definition of agitation in patients with cognitive disorders that can be applied in epidemiologic, non-interventional clinical, pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic interventional, and neurobiological studies. A consensus definition will facilitate communication and cross-study comparison and may have regulatory applications in drug development programs. Methods: The ADWG developed a transparent process using a combination of electronic, face-to-face, and survey-based strategies to develop a consensus based on agreement of a majority of participants. Nine-hundred twenty-eight respondents participated in the different phases of the process. Results: Agitation was defined broadly as: (1) occurring in patients with a cognitive impairment or dementia syndrome; (2) exhibiting behavior consistent with emotional distress; (3) manifesting excessive motor activity, verbal aggression, or physical aggression; and (4) evidencing behaviors that cause excess disability and are not solely attributable to another disorder (psychiatric, medical, or substance-related). A majority of the respondents rated all surveyed elements of the definition as strongly agree or somewhat agree (68-88% across elements). A majority of the respondents agreed that the definition is appropriate for clinical and research applications. Conclusions: A provisional consensus definition of agitation has been developed. This definition can be used to advance interventional and non-interventional research of agitation in patients with cognitive impairment. Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2014.
Yesavage J.A.,Stanford University |
Taylor J.L.,Stanford University |
Friedman L.,Stanford University |
Rosenberg P.B.,Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center |
And 13 more authors.
Journal of Psychiatric Research | Year: 2016
Background: We developed a composite measure of agitation as a secondary outcome of change over time in the Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's disease study (CitAD). CitAD demonstrated a positive effect of citalopram on agitation on the Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A). CitAD included additional agitation measures such as the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory. Methods: We performed principal components analyses on change in individual item of these scales for the same, original CitAD subjects. Results: The first principal component accounted for 12.6% of the observed variance and was composed of items that appear to reflect agitation. The effect size for citalopram calculated using this component was 0.53 (95% CI 0.22-0.83) versus 0.32 for the NBRS-A (95% CI 0.01-0.62). Conclusions: Results suggest that a composite measure of change in agitation might be more sensitive than change in a single primary agitation measure. © 2016.