Jak Amy J, Preis Sarah R, Beiser Alexa S, Seshadri Sudha, Wolf Philip A, Bondi Mark W, Au Rhoda
1VA San Diego Healthcare System,San Diego,California.
3Framingham Heart Study,Framingham,Massachusetts.
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2016 Oct;22(9):937-943. doi: 10.1017/S1355617716000199. Epub 2016 Mar 31.
To refine mild cognitive impairment (MCI) diagnostic criteria, we examined progression to dementia using two approaches to identifying MCI.
A total of 1203 Framingham Heart Study participants were classified at baseline as cognitively normal or MCI (overall and four MCI subtypes) via conventional Petersen/Winblad criteria (single cognitive test impaired per domain, >1.5 SD below expectations) or Jak/Bondi criteria (two tests impaired per domain, >1 SD below norms). Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to examine the association between each MCI definition and incident dementia.
The Petersen/Winblad criteria classified 34% of participants as having MCI while the Jak/Bondi criteria classified 24% as MCI. Over a mean follow-up of 9.7 years, 58 participants (5%) developed incident dementia. Both MCI criteria were associated with incident dementia [Petersen/Winblad: hazards ratio (HR) = 2.64; p-value=.0002; Jak/Bondi: HR=3.30; p-value <.0001]. When both MCI definitions were included in the same model, only the Jak/Bondi definition remained statistically significantly associated with incident dementia (HR=2.47; p-value=.008). Multi-domain amnestic and single domain non-amnestic MCI subtypes were significantly associated with incident dementia for both diagnostic approaches (all p-values <.01).
The Jak/Bondi MCI criteria had a similar association with dementia as the conventional Petersen/Winblad MCI criteria, despite classifying ~30% fewer participants as having MCI. Further exploration of alternative methods to conventional MCI diagnostic criteria is warranted. (JINS, 2016, 22, 937-943).
为完善轻度认知障碍(MCI)诊断标准,我们采用两种识别MCI的方法研究其向痴呆症的进展情况。
共有1203名弗雷明汉心脏研究参与者在基线时通过传统的彼得森/温布拉德标准(每个领域单项认知测试受损,低于预期>1.5标准差)或雅克/邦迪标准(每个领域两项测试受损,低于常模>1标准差)被分类为认知正常或MCI(总体及四种MCI亚型)。构建Cox比例风险模型以研究每种MCI定义与新发痴呆症之间的关联。
彼得森/温布拉德标准将34%的参与者分类为患有MCI,而雅克/邦迪标准将24%的参与者分类为MCI。在平均9.7年的随访期内,58名参与者(5%)发生了新发痴呆症。两种MCI标准均与新发痴呆症相关[彼得森/温布拉德:风险比(HR)=2.64;p值=0.0002;雅克/邦迪:HR=3.30;p值<0.0001]。当将两种MCI定义纳入同一模型时,只有雅克/邦迪定义与新发痴呆症仍存在统计学显著关联(HR=2.47;p值=0.008)。对于两种诊断方法,多领域遗忘型和单领域非遗忘型MCI亚型均与新发痴呆症显著相关(所有p值<0.01)。
尽管将被分类为患有MCI的参与者数量少约30%,但雅克/邦迪MCI标准与传统的彼得森/温布拉德MCI标准在与痴呆症的关联方面相似。有必要进一步探索传统MCI诊断标准的替代方法。(《神经心理学杂志》,2016年,22卷,937 - 943页)