scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Charles DeCarli

Bio: Charles DeCarli is an academic researcher from University of California, Davis. The author has contributed to research in topics: Dementia & Hyperintensity. The author has an hindex of 125, co-authored 614 publications receiving 65820 citations. Previous affiliations of Charles DeCarli include University of Southern California & French Institute of Health and Medical Research.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: These criteria for the diagnosis of vascular dementia are intended as a guide for case definition in neuroepidemiologic studies, stratified by levels of certainty (definite, probable, and possible).
Abstract: Criteria for the diagnosis of vascular dementia (VaD) that are reliable, valid, and readily applicable in a variety of settings are urgently needed for both clinical and research purposes. To address this need, the Neuroepidemiology Branch of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) convened an International Workshop with support from the Association Internationale pour la Recherche et l'Enseignement en Neurosciences (AIREN), resulting in research criteria for the diagnosis of VaD. Compared with other current criteria, these guidelines emphasize (1) the heterogeneity of vascular dementia syndromes and pathologic subtypes including ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, cerebral hypoxic-ischemic events, and senile leukoencephalopathic lesions; (2) the variability in clinical course, which may be static, remitting, or progressive; (3) specific clinical findings early in the course (eg, gait disorder, incontinence, or mood and personality changes) that support a vascular rather than a degenerative cause; (4) the need to establish a temporal relationship between stroke and dementia onset for a secure diagnosis; (5) the importance of brain imaging to support clinical findings; (6) the value of neuropsychological testing to document impairments in multiple cognitive domains; and (7) a protocol for neuropathologic evaluations and correlative studies of clinical, radiologic, and neuropsychological features. These criteria are intended as a guide for case definition in neuroepidemiologic studies, stratified by levels of certainty (definite, probable, and possible). They await testing and validation and will be revised as more information becomes available.

4,603 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A multidisciplinary, international group of experts discussed the current status and future directions of MCI, with regard to clinical presentation, cognitive and functional assessment, and the role of neuroimaging, biomarkers and genetics.
Abstract: The First Key Symposium was held in Stockholm, Sweden, 2-5 September 2003. The aim of the symposium was to integrate clinical and epidemiological perspectives on the topic of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). A multidisciplinary, international group of experts discussed the current status and future directions of MCI, with regard to clinical presentation, cognitive and functional assessment, and the role of neuroimaging, biomarkers and genetics. Agreement on new perspectives, as well as recommendations for management and future research were discussed by the international working group. The specific recommendations for the general MCI criteria include the following: (i) the person is neither normal nor demented; (ii) there is evidence of cognitive deterioration shown by either objectively measured decline over time and/or subjective report of decline by self and/or informant in conjunction with objective cognitive deficits; and (iii) activities of daily living are preserved and complex instrumental functions are either intact or minimally impaired.

4,206 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This Position Paper summarises the main outcomes of this international effort to provide the STandards for ReportIng Vascular changes on nEuroimaging (STRIVE).
Abstract: Cerebral small vessel disease (SVD) is a common accompaniment of ageing. Features seen on neuroimaging include recent small subcortical infarcts, lacunes, white matter hyperintensities, perivascular spaces, microbleeds, and brain atrophy. SVD can present as a stroke or cognitive decline, or can have few or no symptoms. SVD frequently coexists with neurodegenerative disease, and can exacerbate cognitive deficits, physical disabilities, and other symptoms of neurodegeneration. Terminology and definitions for imaging the features of SVD vary widely, which is also true for protocols for image acquisition and image analysis. This lack of consistency hampers progress in identifying the contribution of SVD to the pathophysiology and clinical features of common neurodegenerative diseases. We are an international working group from the Centres of Excellence in Neurodegeneration. We completed a structured process to develop definitions and imaging standards for markers and consequences of SVD. We aimed to achieve the following: first, to provide a common advisory about terms and definitions for features visible on MRI; second, to suggest minimum standards for image acquisition and analysis; third, to agree on standards for scientific reporting of changes related to SVD on neuroimaging; and fourth, to review emerging imaging methods for detection and quantification of preclinical manifestations of SVD. Our findings and recommendations apply to research studies, and can be used in the clinical setting to standardise image interpretation, acquisition, and reporting. This Position Paper summarises the main outcomes of this international effort to provide the STandards for ReportIng Vascular changes on nEuroimaging (STRIVE).

3,691 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The approach taken in ADNI to standardization across sites and platforms of the MRI protocol, postacquisition corrections, and phantom‐based monitoring of all scanners could be used as a model for other multisite trials.
Abstract: Dementia, one of the most feared associates of increasing longevity, represents a pressing public health problem and major research priority. Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia, affecting many millions around the world. There is currently no cure for AD, but large numbers of novel compounds are currently under development that have the potential to modify the course of the disease and slow its progression. There is a pressing need for imaging biomarkers to improve understanding of the disease and to assess the efficacy of these proposed treatments. Structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has already been shown to be sensitive to presymptomatic disease (1-10) and has the potential to provide such a biomarker. For use in large-scale multicenter studies, however, standardized methods that produce stable results across scanners and over time are needed. The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) study is a longitudinal multisite observational study of elderly individuals with normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or AD (11,12). It is jointly funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and industry via the Foundation for the NIH. The study will assess how well information (alone or in combination) obtained from MRI, (18F)-fludeoyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET), urine, serum, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers, as well as clinical and neuropsychometric assessments, can measure disease progression in the three groups of elderly subjects mentioned above. At the 55 participating sites in North America, imaging, clinical, and biologic samples will be collected at multiple time points in 200 elderly cognitively normal, 400 MCI, and 200 AD subjects. All subjects will be scanned with 1.5 T MRI at each time point, and half of these will also be scanned with FDG PET. Subjects not assigned to the PET arm of the study will be eligible for 3 T MRI scanning. The goal is to acquire both 1.5 T and 3 T MRI studies at multiple time points in 25% of the subjects who do not undergo PET scanning [R2C1]. CSF collection at both baseline and 12 months is targeted for 50% of the subjects. Sampling varies by clinical group. Healthy elderly controls will be sampled at 0, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Subjects with MCI will be sampled at 0, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months. AD subjects will be sampled at 0, 6, 12, and 24 months. Major goals of the ADNI study are: to link all of these data at each time point and make this repository available to the general scientific community; to develop technical standards for imaging in longitudinal studies; to determine the optimum methods for acquiring and analyzing images; to validate imaging and biomarker data by correlating these with concurrent psychometric and clinical assessments; and to improve methods for clinical trials in MCI and AD. The ADNI study overall is divided into cores, with each core managing ADNI-related activities within its sphere of expertise: clinical, informatics, biostatistics, biomarkers, and imaging. The purpose of this report is to describe the MRI methods and decision-making process underlying the selection of the MRI protocol employed in the ADNI study.

3,611 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 2011-Stroke
TL;DR: This scientific statement provides an overview of the evidence on vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia and provides evidence that subcortical forms of VCI with white matter hyperintensities and small deep infarcts are common and risk markers for VCI are the same as traditional risk factors for stroke.
Abstract: Background and Purpose—This scientific statement provides an overview of the evidence on vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia. Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment ...

2,731 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In those older than age 50, systolic blood pressure of greater than 140 mm Hg is a more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP, and hypertension will be controlled only if patients are motivated to stay on their treatment plan.
Abstract: The National High Blood Pressure Education Program presents the complete Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Like its predecessors, the purpose is to provide an evidence-based approach to the prevention and management of hypertension. The key messages of this report are these: in those older than age 50, systolic blood pressure (BP) of greater than 140 mm Hg is a more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP; beginning at 115/75 mm Hg, CVD risk doubles for each increment of 20/10 mm Hg; those who are normotensive at 55 years of age will have a 90% lifetime risk of developing hypertension; prehypertensive individuals (systolic BP 120-139 mm Hg or diastolic BP 80-89 mm Hg) require health-promoting lifestyle modifications to prevent the progressive rise in blood pressure and CVD; for uncomplicated hypertension, thiazide diuretic should be used in drug treatment for most, either alone or combined with drugs from other classes; this report delineates specific high-risk conditions that are compelling indications for the use of other antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers); two or more antihypertensive medications will be required to achieve goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg, or <130/80 mm Hg) for patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease; for patients whose BP is more than 20 mm Hg above the systolic BP goal or more than 10 mm Hg above the diastolic BP goal, initiation of therapy using two agents, one of which usually will be a thiazide diuretic, should be considered; regardless of therapy or care, hypertension will be controlled only if patients are motivated to stay on their treatment plan. Positive experiences, trust in the clinician, and empathy improve patient motivation and satisfaction. This report serves as a guide, and the committee continues to recognize that the responsible physician's judgment remains paramount.

14,975 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The workgroup sought to ensure that the revised criteria would be flexible enough to be used by both general healthcare providers without access to neuropsychological testing, advanced imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid measures, and specialized investigators involved in research or in clinical trial studies who would have these tools available.
Abstract: The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of revising the 1984 criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. The workgroup sought to ensure that the revised criteria would be flexible enough to be used by both general healthcare providers without access to neuropsychological testing, advanced imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid measures, and specialized investigators involved in research or in clinical trial studies who would have these tools available. We present criteria for all-cause dementia and for AD dementia. We retained the general framework of probable AD dementia from the 1984 criteria. On the basis of the past 27 years of experience, we made several changes in the clinical criteria for the diagnosis. We also retained the term possible AD dementia, but redefined it in a manner more focused than before. Biomarker evidence was also integrated into the diagnostic formulations for probable and possible AD dementia for use in research settings. The core clinical criteria for AD dementia will continue to be the cornerstone of the diagnosis in clinical practice, but biomarker evidence is expected to enhance the pathophysiological specificity of the diagnosis of AD dementia. Much work lies ahead for validating the biomarker diagnosis of AD dementia.

13,710 citations

01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care.
Abstract: XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

9,618 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: WRITING GROUP MEMBERS Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, SCM, FAHA Michael J. Reeves, PhD Matthew Ritchey, PT, DPT, OCS, MPH Carlos J. Jiménez, ScD, SM Lori Chaffin Jordan,MD, PhD Suzanne E. Judd, PhD
Abstract: WRITING GROUP MEMBERS Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, SCM, FAHA Michael J. Blaha, MD, MPH Stephanie E. Chiuve, ScD Mary Cushman, MD, MSc, FAHA Sandeep R. Das, MD, MPH, FAHA Rajat Deo, MD, MTR Sarah D. de Ferranti, MD, MPH James Floyd, MD, MS Myriam Fornage, PhD, FAHA Cathleen Gillespie, MS Carmen R. Isasi, MD, PhD, FAHA Monik C. Jiménez, ScD, SM Lori Chaffin Jordan, MD, PhD Suzanne E. Judd, PhD Daniel Lackland, DrPH, FAHA Judith H. Lichtman, PhD, MPH, FAHA Lynda Lisabeth, PhD, MPH, FAHA Simin Liu, MD, ScD, FAHA Chris T. Longenecker, MD Rachel H. Mackey, PhD, MPH, FAHA Kunihiro Matsushita, MD, PhD, FAHA Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, DrPH, FAHA Michael E. Mussolino, PhD, FAHA Khurram Nasir, MD, MPH, FAHA Robert W. Neumar, MD, PhD, FAHA Latha Palaniappan, MD, MS, FAHA Dilip K. Pandey, MBBS, MS, PhD, FAHA Ravi R. Thiagarajan, MD, MPH Mathew J. Reeves, PhD Matthew Ritchey, PT, DPT, OCS, MPH Carlos J. Rodriguez, MD, MPH, FAHA Gregory A. Roth, MD, MPH Wayne D. Rosamond, PhD, FAHA Comilla Sasson, MD, PhD, FAHA Amytis Towfighi, MD Connie W. Tsao, MD, MPH Melanie B. Turner, MPH Salim S. Virani, MD, PhD, FAHA Jenifer H. Voeks, PhD Joshua Z. Willey, MD, MS John T. Wilkins, MD Jason HY. Wu, MSc, PhD, FAHA Heather M. Alger, PhD Sally S. Wong, PhD, RD, CDN, FAHA Paul Muntner, PhD, MHSc On behalf of the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update

7,190 citations