Background Subjects with a mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have a memory impairment beyond that expected for age and education yet are not demented. These subjects are becoming the focus of many prediction studies and early intervention trials. Objective To characterize clinically subjects with MCI cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Design A prospective, longitudinal inception cohort. Setting General community clinic. Participants A sample of 76 consecutively evaluated subjects with MCI were compared with 234 healthy control subjects and 106 patients with mild Alzheimer disease (AD), all from a community setting as part of the Mayo Clinic Alzheimer's Disease Center/Alzheimer's Disease Patient Registry, Rochester, Minn. Main Outcome Measures The 3 groups of individuals were compared on demographic factors and measures of cognitive function including the Mini-Mental State Examination, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Revised, Wechsler Memory Scale–Revised, Dementia Rating Scale, Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test, and Auditory Verbal Learning Test. Clinical classifications of dementia and AD were determined according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Revised Third Edition and the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke–Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association criteria, respectively. Results The primary distinction between control subjects and subjects with MCI was in the area of memory, while other cognitive functions were comparable. However, when the subjects with MCI were compared with the patients with very mild AD, memory performance was similar, but patients with AD were more impaired in other cognitive domains as well. Longitudinal performance demonstrated that the subjects with MCI declined at a rate greater than that of the controls but less rapidly than the patients with mild AD. Conclusions Patients who meet the criteria for MCI can be differentiated from healthy control subjects and those with very mild AD. They appear to constitute a clinical entity that can be characterized for treatment interventions.

/pdf/mild-cognitive-impairment-clinical-characterization-and-294aut8v7m.pdf

Mild Cognitive Impairment: Clinical Characterization and Outcome

The field of aging and dementia is focusing on the characterization of the earliest stages of cognitive impairment. Recent research has identified a transitional state between the cognitive changes of normal aging and Alzheimer's disease (AD), known as mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Mild cognitive impairment refers to the clinical condition between normal aging and AD in which persons experience memory loss to a greater extent than one would expect for age, yet they do not meet currently accepted criteria for clinically probable AD. When these persons are observed longitudinally, they progress to clinically probable AD at a considerably accelerated rate compared with healthy age-matched individuals. Consequently, this condition has been recognized as suitable for possible therapeutic intervention, and several multicenter international treatment trials are under way. Because this is a topic of intense interest, a group of experts on aging and MCI from around the world in the fields of neurology, psychiatry, geriatrics, neuropsychology, neuroimaging, neuropathology, clinical trials, and ethics was convened to summarize the current state of the field of MCI. Participants reviewed the world scientific literature on aging and MCI and summarized the various topics with respect to available evidence on MCI. Diagnostic criteria and clinical outcomes of these subjects are available in the literature. Mild cognitive impairment is believed to be a high-risk condition for the development of clinically probable AD. Heterogeneity in the use of the term was recognized, and subclassifications were suggested. While no treatments are recommended for MCI currently, clinical trials regarding potential therapies are under way. Recommendations concerning ethical issues in the diagnosis and the management of subjects with MCI were made.

https://homepage.univie.ac.at/peter.dal-bianco/memory-clinic/mcipetersen.pdf

Current concepts in mild cognitive impairment.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(06)68880-6.pdf

Mild cognitive impairment

Article abstract—Objective: The goal of this project was to determine whether screening different groups of elderly individuals in a general or specialty practice would be beneficial in detecting dementia. Background: Epidemiologic studies of aging and dementia have demonstrated that the use of research criteria for the classification of dementia has yielded three groups of subjects: those who are demented, those who are not demented, and a third group of individuals who cannot be classified as normal or demented but who are cognitively (usually memory) impaired. Methods: The authors conducted computerized literature searches and generated a set of abstracts based on text and index words selected to reflect the key issues to be addressed. Articles were abstracted to determine whether there were sufficient data to recommend the screening of asymptomatic individuals. Other research studies were evaluated to determine whether there was value in identifying individuals who were memory-impaired beyond what one would expect for age but who were not demented. Finally, screening instruments and evaluation techniques for the identification of cognitive impairment were reviewed. Results: There were insufficient data to make any recommendations regarding cognitive screening of asymptomatic individuals. Persons with memory impairment who were not demented were characterized in the literature as having mild cognitive impairment. These subjects were at increased risk for developing dementia or AD when compared with similarly aged individuals in the general population. Recommendations: There were sufficient data to recommend the evaluation and clinical monitoring of persons with mild cognitive impairment due to their increased risk for developing dementia (Guideline). Screening instruments, e.g., Mini-Mental State Examination, were found to be useful to the clinician for assessing the degree of cognitive impairment (Guideline), as were neuropsychologic batteries (Guideline), brief focused cognitive instruments (Option), and certain structured informant interviews (Option). Increasing attention is being paid to persons with mild cognitive impairment for whom treatment options are being evaluated that may alter the rate of progression to dementia.

https://n.neurology.org/content/neurology/56/9/1133.full.pdf

Practice parameter: Early detection of dementia: Mild cognitive impairment (an evidence-based review) Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

Background Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is considered to be a transitional stage between aging and Alzheimer disease (AD). Objective To determine whether MCI represents early-stage AD by examining its natural history and neuropathologic basis. Design A prospective clinical and psychometric study of community-living elderly volunteers, both nondemented and minimally cognitively impaired, followed up for up to 9.5 years. Neuropathologic examinations were performed on participants who had undergone autopsy. Setting An AD research center. Participants All participants enrolled between July 1990 and June 1997 with Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scores of 0 (cognitively healthy; n = 177; mean age, 78.9 years) or 0.5 (equivalent to MCI; n = 277; mean age, 76.9 years). Based on the degree of clinical confidence that MCI represented dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT), 3 subgroups of individuals with CDR scores of 0.5 were identified: CDR 0.5/DAT, CDR 0.5/incipient DAT, and CDR 0.5/uncertain dementia. Main Outcome Measure Progression to the stage of CDR 1, which characterizes mild definite DAT. Results Survival analysis showed that 100% of CDR 0.5/DAT participants progressed to greater dementia severity over a 9.5-year period. At 5 years, rates of progression to a score of CDR 1 (or greater) for DAT were 60.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50.2%-70.8%) for the CDR 0.5/DAT group, 35.7% (95% CI, 21.0%-50.3%) for the CDR 0.5/incipient DAT group, 19.9% (95% CI, 8.0%-31.8%) for the CDR 0.5/uncertain dementia group, and 6.8% (95% CI, 2.2%-11.3%) for CDR 0/controls. Progression to greater dementia severity correlated with degree of cognitive impairment at baseline. Twenty-four of the 25 participants with scores of CDR 0.5 had a neuropathologic dementing disorder, which was AD in 21 (84%). Conclusions Individuals currently characterized as having MCI progress steadily to greater stages of dementia severity at rates dependent on the level of cognitive impairment at entry and they almost always have the neuropathologic features of AD. We conclude that MCI generally represents early-stage AD.

https://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/alzheimer.pdf

Mild cognitive impairment represents early-stage Alzheimer disease.

We determined whether a battery of neuropsychological tests could predict who would develop Alzheimer's disease (AD) in a group of 123 memory-impaired nondemented patients. Patients were followed longitudinally for 2 years with a research battery of neuropsychological tests. After 2 years, 29 developed probable AD, and 94 did not develop dementia. We used logistic regression analyses to examine the classification accuracy of subjects' performance at entry to the study on the research battery. The logistic regression model was significant with an accuracy of 89%, sensitivity of 76%, and specificity of 94%. Two tests contributed significantly to this model: the delayed recall from the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test and the Mental Control subtest of the Wechsler Memory Scale. These two tests alone produced the same accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity as the larger model. These results demonstrate that probable AD can be predicted with a high degree of accuracy and with a relatively brief battery of neuropsychological tests.

Prediction of probable Alzheimer's disease in memory-impaired patients: A prospective longitudinal study

Objective: To examine the convergent and, for the first time to our knowledge, the divergent validity of 4 of the subtests of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE): attention, naming, memory, and copy. Method: Participants included 126 memory-impaired individuals (mean age, 74 years). Because the naming subtest showed no variability, we did not analyze it further. Results: The convergent validity of the attention, memory, and copy subtests was confirmed with Spearman rank correlation coefficient. Each MMSE subtest was significantly related to a parallel neuropsychological test. We measured divergent validity by testing the difference between the MMSE subtest correlation with its parallel neuropsychological test and its nonparallel neuropsychological test. The MMSE subtests of attention and memory showed similar relationships with their parallel neuropsychological tests as they did with nonparallel neuropsychological tests of attention, memory, and naming. These 2 subtests, however, did show divergence from a neuropsychological test of copy, most likely indicating that these 2 MMSE subtests are measuring the verbal (and not the performance) domain. The MMSE subtest of copy showed the poorest convergent and divergent validity. Conclusions: The 3 subtests did not show sufficient divergent validity to warrant a conclusion of their domain specificity. Thus, when a more detailed diagnostic profile is required, a thorough neuropsychological evaluation will provide a more valid description of an individual's cognitive profile.

E. Dunn

Papers

Prediction of probable Alzheimer's disease in memory-impaired patients: A prospective longitudinal study

Domain Specificity of the Subtests of the Mini-Mental State Examination