Classification, Prediction, and Concordance of Cognitive and Functional Progression in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment in the United States: A Latent Class Analysis

Background: Progression trajectories of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are currently not well understood. Objective: To classify patients with incident MCI into different latent classes of progression and identify predictors of progression class. Methods: Participants with incident MCI were identified from the US National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set (09/2005-02/2019). Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR (R)) Dementia Staging Instrument-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score longitudinal trajectories from MCI diagnosis were fitted using growth mixture models. Predictors of progression class were identified using multivariate multinomial logistic regression models; odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. Results: In total, 21%, 22%, and 57% of participants (N=830) experienced fast, slow, and no progression on CDR-SB, respectively; for FAQ, these figures were 14%, 23%, and 64%, respectively. CDR-SB and FAQ class membership was concordant for most participants (77%). Older age (>= 86 versus <= 70 years, OR [95% CI] = 5.26 [1.78-15.54]), one copy of APOE epsilon 4 (1.94 [1.08-3.47]), higher baseline CDR-SB (2.46 [1.56-3.88]), lower baseline MMSE (0.85 [0.75-0.97]), and higher baseline FAQ (1.13 [1.02-1.26]) scores were significant predictors of fast progression versus no progression based on CDR-SB (all p < 0.05). Predictors of FAQ class membership were largely similar. Conclusion: Approximately a third of participants experienced progression based on CDR-SB or FAQ during the 4-year follow-up period. CDR-SB and FAQ class assignment were concordant for the vast majority of participants. Identified predictors may help the selection of patients at higher risk of progression in future trials.

Automated summary

Approximately a third of participants experienced progression based on CDR-SB or FAQ during the 4-year follow-up period. CDR-SB and FAQ class assignment were concordant for the vast majority of participants. Identified predictors may help the selection of patients at higher risk of progression in future trials.