Advertisement

Alzheimer’s Disease Composite Score: a Post-Hoc Analysis Using Data from the LipiDiDiet Trial in Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease

  • Suzanne B. HendrixEmail author
  • H. Soininen
  • A. M. J. van Hees
  • N. Ellison
  • P. J. Visser
  • A. Solomon
  • A. Attali
  • K. Blennow
  • M. Kivipelto
  • T. Hartmann
Brief Reports
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

As research evolves in prodromal AD, the need to validate sufficiently sensitive outcome measures, e.g. the Alzheimer’s Disease Composite Score (ADCOMS) is clear. In the LipiDiDiet randomized trial in prodromal AD, cognitive decline in the study population was much less than expected in the timeframe studied. While the primary composite endpoint was insufficiently sensitive to detect a difference in the modified intention to treat population, the per-protocol population showed less decline in the active than the control group, indicating better treatment effects with regular product intake. These results were further strengthened by significant benefits on secondary endpoints of cognition and function, and brain atrophy. The present post-hoc analysis investigated whether ADCOMS could detect a difference between groups in the LipiDiDiet population (138 active, 140 control). The estimated mean change in ADCOMS from baseline (standard error) was 0.085 (0.018) in the active and 0.133 (0.018) in the control group; estimated mean treatment difference −0.048 (95% confidence intervals −0.090, −0.007; p=0.023), or 36% less decline in the active group. This suggests ADCOMS identified the cognitive and functional benefits observed previously, confirming the sensitivity of this composite measure.

Key words

Alzheimer’s disease prodromal cognitive function nutrients Souvenaid Fortasyn 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank all participants enrolled in the study and their families; all members of the LipiDiDiet clinical study group; all investigators and on-site study staff for their efforts in the conduct of the field work.

Funding: The research leading to these results was mainly funded by the European Commission under the 7th framework program of the European Union (grant agreement number 211696). Additional funding was provided by the EU Joint Program — Neurodegenerative Disease Research (MIND-AD grant); Kuopio University Hospital, Finland (EVO/VTR grant); and Academy of Finland (grant 287490). These funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the preparation of the manuscript; or in the review or approval of the manuscript. This post-hoc analysis was funded by Danone Nutricia Research and performed by Pentara Corporation. The corresponding author had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

Ethical standards: The study was approved by ethics committees of all sites and done in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and International Conference on Harmonization Good Clinical Practice guidelines.

References

  1. 1.
    Dubois B, Feldman HH, Jacova C, et al. Research criteria for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: revising the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6:734–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dubois B, Feldman HH, Jacova C, et al. Advancing research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s disease: the IWG-2 criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:614–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dubois B, Hampel H, Feldman HH, et al. Preclinical Alzheimer’s disease: Definition, natural history, and diagnostic criteria. Alzheimers Dement. 2016;12:292–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Soininen H, Solomon A, Visser PJ, et al. 24-month intervention with a specific multinutrient in people with prodromal Alzheimer’s disease (LipiDiDiet): a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16:965–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hamel R, Kohler S, Sistermans N, et al. The trajectory of cognitive decline in the pre-dementia phase in memory clinic visitors: findings from the 4C-MCI study. Psychol Med. 2015;45:1509–1519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellis KA, Szoeke C, Bush AI, et al. Rates of diagnostic transition and cognitive change at 18-month follow-up among 1,112 participants in the Australian Imaging, Biomarkers and Lifestyle Flagship Study of Ageing (AIBL). Int Psychogeriatr. 2014;26:543–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration. Early Alzheimer’s Disease: Developing Drugs for Treatment Guidance for Industry (Draft Guidance) 2018. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM596728.pdf.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang J, Logovinsky V, Hendrix SB, et al. ADCOMS: a composite clinical outcome for prodromal Alzheimer’s disease trials. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2016;87:993–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Swanson CJ, Zhang Y, Dhadda S, et al. Treatment of early AD subjects with BAN2401, an anti-Aβ protofibril monoclonal antibody, significantly clears amyloid plaque and reduces clinical decline. Alzheimer’s Association International Conference; 20–26 July 2018; Chicago, USA2018. p. Abstract ID: 27531.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Second edition). 2 ed: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vellas B, Bateman R, Blennow K, et al. Endpoints for pre-dementia AD trials: A report from the EU/US/CTAD Task Force. J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2015;2:128–135.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Serdi and Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Suzanne B. Hendrix
    • 1
    Email author
  • H. Soininen
    • 2
    • 3
  • A. M. J. van Hees
    • 4
  • N. Ellison
    • 1
  • P. J. Visser
    • 5
    • 6
  • A. Solomon
    • 2
    • 7
    • 8
  • A. Attali
    • 4
  • K. Blennow
    • 9
    • 10
  • M. Kivipelto
    • 2
    • 7
    • 8
  • T. Hartmann
    • 11
    • 12
  1. 1.Pentara CorporationSalt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.Department of Neurology, Institute of Clinical MedicineUniversity of Eastern Finland and Kuopio University HospitalKuopioFinland
  3. 3.Neurocenter, Department of NeurologyKuopio University HospitalKuopioFinland
  4. 4.Danone Nutricia ResearchNutricia Advanced Medical NutritionUtrechtthe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Alzheimer Center LimburgUniversity of MaastrichtMaastrichtthe Netherlands
  6. 6.Department of Neurology, Alzheimer CenterVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamthe Netherlands
  7. 7.Department of Clinical GeriatricsNVS, Karolinska InstitutetHuddingeSweden
  8. 8.Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Geriatric MedicineKarolinska University HospitalHuddingeSweden
  9. 9.Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and PhysiologyThe Sahlgrenska Academy at University of GothenburgMölndalSweden
  10. 10.Clinical Neurochemistry LaboratorySahlgrenska University HospitalMölndalSweden
  11. 11.Deutsches Institut für Demenz Prävention (DIDP), Medical FacultySaarland UniversityHomburgGermany
  12. 12.Department of Experimental NeurologySaarland UniversityHomburgGermany

Personalised recommendations