4.7 Article

Minor neuropsychological deficits in patients with subjective cognitive decline

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 95, 期 9, 页码 E1134-E1143

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000010142

关键词

-

资金

  1. (DZNE) [BN012]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To determine the nature and extent of minor neuropsychological deficits in patients with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and their association with CSF biomarkers of Alzheimer disease (AD). Method We analyzed data from n = 449 cognitively normal participants (n = 209 healthy controls, n = 240 patients with SCD) from an interim data release of the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases Longitudinal Cognitive Impairment and Dementia Study (DELCODE). An extensive neuropsychological test battery was applied at baseline for which we established a latent, 5 cognitive domain factor structure comprising learning and memory, executive functions, language abilities, working memory, and visuospatial functions. We compared groups in terms of global and domain-specific performance and correlated performance with different CSF markers of AD pathology. Results We observed worse performance (Cohen d = approximate to 0.25-0.5, adjusted for age, sex differences with analysis of covariance) in global performance, memory, executive functions, and language abilities for the SCD group compared to healthy controls. In addition, worse performance in these domains was moderately (r= approximate to 0.3) associated with lower CSF beta-amyloid(42/40)and CSF beta-amyloid(42)/phosphorylated tau181 in the whole sample and specifically in the SCD subgroup. Conclusions Within the spectrum of clinically unimpaired (i.e., before mild cognitive impairment) cognitive performance, SCD is associated with minor deficits in memory, executive function, and language abilities. The association of these subtle cognitive deficits with AD CSF biomarkers speaks to their validity and potential use for the early detection of underlying preclinical AD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据