Depression in Alzheimer''s Disease: A Delphi Consensus on Etiology, Risk Factors, and Clinical Management

Background: Alzheimer''s disease (AD) and other forms of dementia are among the most common causes of disability in the elderly. Dementia is often accompanied by depression, but specific diagnostic criteria and treatment approaches are still lacking. This study aimed to gather expert opinions on dementia and depressed patient management to reduce heterogeneity in everyday practice. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, 2-round Modified Delphi survey with 53 questions regarding risk factors (11), signs and symptoms (7), diagnosis (8), and treatment (27) of depression in dementia, with a particular focus on AD. The questionnaire was completed by a panel of 37 expert physicians in neurodegenerative diseases (19 neurologists, 17 psychiatrists, and 1 geriatrician). Results: Consensus was achieved in 40 (75.5%) of the items: agreement in 33 (62.3%) and disagreement in 7 (13.2%) of them. Among the most relevant findings, depression in the elderly was considered an early sign (prodromal) and/or a dementia risk factor, so routine cognitive check-ups in depressed patients should be adopted, aided by clinical scales and information from relatives. Careful interpretation of neuropsychological assessment must be carried out in patients with depression as it can undermine cognitive outcomes. As agreed, depression in early AD is characterized by somatic symptoms and can be differentiated from apathy by the presence of sadness, depressive thoughts and early-morning awakening. In later-phases, symptoms of depression would include sleep-wake cycle reversal, aggressive behavior, and agitation. Regardless of the stage of dementia, depression would accelerate its course, whereas antidepressants would have the opposite effect. Those that improve cognitive function and/or have a dual or multimodal mode of action were preferred: Duloxetine, venlafaxine/desvenlafaxine, vortioxetine, tianeptine, and mirtazapine. Although antidepressants may be less effective than in cognitively healthy patients, neither dosage nor treatment duration should differ. Anti-dementia cholinesterase inhibitors may have a synergistic effect with antidepressants. Exercise and psychological interventions should not be applied alone before any pharmacological treatment, yet they do play a part in improving depressive symptoms in demented patients. Conclusions: This study sheds light on several unresolved clinical challenges regarding depression in dementia patients. Further studies and specific recommendations for this comorbid patient population are still needed.

Randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of fecal microbiota transplant for initial Clostridium difficile infection in intestinal microbiome

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of fecal donor-unrelated donor mix (FMT-FURM) transplantation as first-line therapy for C. difficile infection (CDI) in intestinal microbiome. Methods We designed an open, two-arm pilot study with oral vancomycin (250mg every 6 h for 10–14 days) or FMT-FURM as treatments for the first CDI episode in hospitalized adult patients in Hospital Universitario “Dr. Jose Eleuterio Gonzalez”. Patients were randomized by a closed envelope method in a 1: 1 ratio to either oral vancomycin or FMT-FURM. CDI resolution was considered when there was a reduction on the Bristol scale of at least 2 points, a reduction of at least 50% in the number of bowel movements, absence of fever, and resolution of abdominal pain (at least two criteria). From each patient, a fecal sample was obtained at days 0, 3, and 7 after treatment. Specimens were cultured to isolate C. difficile, and isolates were characterized by PCR. Susceptibility testing of isolates was performed using the agar dilution method. Fecal samples and FMT-FURM were analyzed by 16S rRNA sequencing. Results We included 19 patients; 10 in the vancomycin arm and 9 in the FMT-FURM arm. However, one of the patients in the vancomycin arm and two patients in the FMT-FURM arm were eliminated. Symptoms resolved in 8/9 patients (88.9%) in the vancomycin group, while symptoms resolved in 4/7 patients (57.1%) after the first FMT-FURM dose (P = 0.26) and in 5/7 patients (71.4%) after the second dose (P = 0.55). During the study, no adverse effects attributable to FMT-FURM were observed in patients. Twelve isolates were recovered, most isolates carried tcdB, tcdA, cdtA, and cdtB, with an 18-bp deletion in tcdC. All isolates were resistant to ciprofloxacin and moxifloxacin but susceptible to metronidazole, linezolid, fidaxomicin, and tetracycline. In the FMT-FURM group, the bacterial composition was dominated by Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, and Proteobacteria at all-time points and the microbiota were remarkably stable over time. The vancomycin group showed a very different pattern of the microbial composition when comparing to the FMT-FURM group over time. Conclusion The results of this preliminary study showed that FMT-FURM for initial CDI is associated with specific bacterial communities that do not resemble the donors’ sample.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

The carriage of interleukin-1B-31*C allele plus Staphylococcus aureus and Haemophilus influenzae increases the risk of recurrent tonsillitis in a Mexican population

Abstract The aim of the present study was to estimate the relative contribution of immunogenetic and microbiological factors in the development of recurrent tonsillitis in a Mexican population. Patients (n = 138) with recurrent tonsillitis and an indication of tonsillectomy (mean age: 6.05 years±3.00; median age: 5 years, female: 58; age range: 1–15 years) and 195 nonrelated controls older than 18 years and a medical history free of recurrent tonsillitis were included. To evaluate the microbial contribution, tonsil swab samples from both groups and extracted tonsil samples from cases were cultured. Biofilm production of isolated bacteria was measured. To assess the immunogenetic component, DNA from peripheral blood was genotyped for the TNFA-308G/A single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) and for the IL1B -31C/T SNP. Normal microbiota, but no pathogens or potential pathogens, were identified from all control sample cultures. The most frequent pathogenic species detected in tonsils from cases were Staphylococcus aureus (48.6%, 67/138) and Haemophilus influenzae (31.9%, 44/138), which were found more frequently in patient samples than in samples from healthy volunteers (P<0.0001). Importantly, 41/54 (75.9%) S. aureus isolates were biofilm producers (18 weak and 23 strong), whereas 17/25 (68%) H. influenzae isolates were biofilm producers (10 weak, and 7 strong biofilm producers). Patients with at least one copy of the IL1B-31*C allele had a higher risk of recurrent tonsillitis (OR = 4.03; 95% CI = 1.27– 14.27; P = 0.013). TNFA-308 G/A alleles were not preferentially distributed among the groups. When considering the presence of IL1B-31*C plus S. aureus, IL1B-31*C plus S. aureus biofilm producer, IL1B-31*C plus H. influenzae or IL1B-31*C plus H. influenzae biofilm producer, the OR tended to infinite. Thus, the presence of IL1B-31*C allele plus the presence of S. aureus and/or H. influenzae could be related to the development of tonsillitis in this particular Mexican population

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for anxiety in people with dementia: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background Many people with dementia experience anxiety, which can lead to decreased independence, relationship difficulties and increased admittance to care homes. Anxiety is often treated with antipsychotic medication, which has limited efficacy and serious side effects. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is widely used to treat anxiety in a range of populations, yet no RCTs on CBT for anxiety in dementia exist. This study aims to develop a CBT for anxiety in dementia manual and to determine its feasibility in a pilot RCT. Methods/design Phase I involves the development of a CBT for anxiety in dementia manual, through a process of (1) focus groups, (2) comprehensive literature reviews, (3) expert consultation, (4) a consensus conference and (5) field testing. Phase II involves the evaluation of the manual with 50 participants with mild to moderate dementia and anxiety (and their carers) in a pilot, two-armed RCT. Participants will receive either ten sessions of CBT or treatment as usual. Primary outcome measures are anxiety and costs. Secondary outcome measures are participant quality of life, behavioural disturbance, cognition, depression, mood and perceived relationship with the carer, and carer mood and perceived relationship with the person with dementia. Measures will be administered at baseline, 15 weeks and 6 months. Approximately 12 qualitative interviews will be used to gather service-users' perspectives on the intervention. Discussion This study aims to determine the feasibility of CBT for people with anxiety and dementia and provide data on the effect size of the intervention in order to conduct a power analysis for a definitive RCT. The manual will be revised according to qualitative and quantitative findings. Its publication will enable its availability throughout the NHS and beyond. Trial registration ISRCTN6480685

Who leads research productivity growth? Guidelines for R&D policy-makers

[EN] This paper evaluates to what extent policy-makers have been able to promote the creation and consolidation of comprehensive research groups that contribute to the implementation of a successful innovation system. Malmquist productivity indices are applied in the case of the Spanish Food Technology Program, finding that a large size and a comprehensive multi-dimensional research output are the key features of the leading groups exhibiting high efficiency and productivity levels. While identifying these groups as benchmarks, we conclude that the financial grants allocated by the program, typically aimed at small-sized and partially oriented research groups, have not succeeded in reorienting them in time so as to overcome their limitations. We suggest that this methodology offers relevant conclusions to policy evaluation methods, helping policy-makers to readapt and reorient policies and their associated means, most notably resource allocation (financial schemes), to better respond to the actual needs of research groups in their search for excellence (micro-level perspective), and to adapt future policy design to the achievement of medium-long term policy objectives (meso and macro-level).Jiménez Saez, F.; Zabala Iturriagagoitia, JM.; Zofio, JL. (2013). Who leads research productivity growth? Guidelines for R&D policy-makers. Scientometrics. 94(1):273-303. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0763-0S273303941Abbring, J. H., & Heckman, J. J. (2008). Dynamic policy analysis. In L. Mátyás & P. Sevestre (Eds.), The econometrics of panel data (3rd ed., pp. 795–863). Heidelberg: Springer.Acosta Ballesteros, J., & Modrego Rico, A. (2001). Public financing of cooperative R&D projects in Spain: the concerted projects under the national R&D plan. Research Policy, 30, 625–641.Arbel, A. (1981). Policy evaluation in the dynamic input–output model. International Journal of Systems Science, 12, 255–260.Arnold, E. (2004). Evaluation research and innovation policy: A systems world needs systems evaluations. Research Evaluation, 13, 3–17.Arrow, J. K. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for inventions. In R. Nelson (Ed.), The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factor (pp. 609–625). Princeton: Princeton University Press and NBER.Autio, E. (1997). New, technology-based firms in innovation networks symplectic and generative impacts. Research Policy, 26, 263–281.Balk, B. (2001). Scale efficiency and productivity change. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 15, 153–183.Balzat, M., & Hanusch, H. (2004). Recent trends in the research on national innovation systems. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14, 197–210.Berg, S. A., Førsund, F. R., & Jansen, E. S. (1992). Malmquist indices of productivity growth during the deregulation of Norwegian banking. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94, S211–S228.Bergek, A., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., Rickne, A., & Jacobsson, S. (2008). Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis. Research Policy, 37, 407–429.Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2005). Exploring size and agglomeration effects on public research productivity. Scientometrics, 63(1), 87–120.Buisseret, T. J., Cameron, H., & Georghiou, L. (1995). What difference does it make? Additionality in the public support of R&D in large firms. International Journal of Technology Management, 10, 587–600.Bustelo, M. (2006). The potential role of standards and guidelines in the development of an evaluation culture in Spain. Evaluation, 12, 437–453.Chavas, J. P., & Cox, T. M. (1999). A generalized distance function and the analysis of production efficiency. Southern Economic Journal, 66, 295–318.CICYT. (1987). Programa Nacional de Tecnología de los Alimentos. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia.CICYT (1988). Plan Nacional de Investigación Científica y Desarrollo Tecnológico 1988–1991. Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, Secretaría de Estado de Universidades e Investigación, Madrid.Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2000). Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-software. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.David, P., Mowery, D., & Steinmueller, W. E. (1994). Analyzing the economic payoffs from basic research. In D. Mowery (Ed.), Science and technology policy in interdependent economies (pp. 57–78). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Dopfer, K., Foster, J., & Potts, J. (2004). Micro-meso-macro. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14, 263–279.Edquist, C., & Hommen, L. (2008). Comparing national systems of innovation in Asia and Europe: Theory and comparative framework. In C. Edquist & L. Hommen (Eds.), Small country innovation systems: Globalisation, change and policy in Asia and Europe (pp. 1–28). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M., & Zhang, Z. (1994). Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. American Economic Review, 84, 66–83.Farrell, M. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, General, 120(3), 253–281.Førsund, F. R. (1993). Productivity growth in Norwegian ferries. In H. O. Fried, C. A. K. Lovell, & S. S. Schmidt (Eds.), The measurement of productive efficiency: Techniques and applications (pp. 352–373). New York: Oxford University Press.Førsund, F. R. (1997). The Malmquist productivity index, TFP and scale. University of Oslo, Oslo: Working Paper, Department of Economics and Business Administration.Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Printer Publishers.García-Martínez, M., & Briz, J. (2000). Innovation in the Spanish food & drink industry. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 3, 155–176.Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage Publications.Grammatikopoulos, V., Kousteiios, A., Tsigilis, N., & Theodorakis, Y. (2004). Applying dynamic evaluation approach in education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 30, 255–263.Grifell-Tatjé, E., & Lovell, C. A. K. (1999). A generalized Malmquist productivity index. Top, 7(1), 81–101.Grimpe, C., & Sofka, W. (2007). Search patterns and absorptive capacity: A comparison of low- and high-technology firms from thirteen European countries. Discussion paper no. 07-062. Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW), Mannheim, Germany.Guan, J., & Wang, J. (2004). Evaluation and interpretation of knowledge production efficiency. Scientometrics, 59(1), 131–155.Hekkert, M. P., Suurs, R. A. A., Negro, S. O., Kuhlmann, S., & Smits, R. E. H. M. (2007). Functions of innovation systems: A new approach for analysing technological change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74, 413–432.Jiménez-Sáez, F. (2005). Una Evaluación del Programa Nacional de Tecnología de Alimentos: análisis de la articulación fomentada sobre el Sistema Alimentario de Innovación en España. PhD dissertation, Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Valencia.Jiménez-Sáez, F., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M., Zofío, J. L., & Castro-Martínez, E. (2011). Evaluating research efficiency within National R&D Programmes. Research Policy, 40, 230–241.Kao, C. (2008). Efficiency analysis of university departments: An empirical study. OMEGA, 36, 653–664.Kuhlmann, S. (2003). Evaluation of research and innovation policies: A discussion of trends with examples from Germany. International Journal of Technology Management, 26, 131–149.Laitinen, E. K. (2002). A dynamic performance measurement system: Evidence from small Finnish technology companies. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 18, 65–99.Laranja, M., Uyarra, E., & Flanagan, K. (2008). Policies for science, technology and innovation: Translating rationales into regional policies in a multi-level setting. Research Policy, 37(5), 823–835.Lee, T.-L., & von Tunzelman, N. (2005). A dynamic analytic approach to national innovation systems: The IC industry in Taiwan. Research Policy, 34, 425–440.Lipsey, R., & Carlaw, K. (1998). A structuralist assessment of technology policies: Taking Schumpeter seriously on policy. Ottawa: Industry Canada Research Publications Program.Lipsey, R., Carlaw, K., & Bekar, C. (2005). Economic transformations: General purpose technologies and long term economic growth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Lundvall, B. Å. (1992). National systems of innovation: Toward a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Printer Publishers.Lundvall, B. Å., Johnson, B., Andersen, E. S., & Dalum, B. (2002). National systems of production, innovation and competence building. Research Policy, 31, 213–231.Markard, J., & Truffer, B. (2008). Actor-oriented analysis of innovation systems: Exploring micro-meso level linkages in the case of stationary fuel cells. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20, 443–464.Metcalfe, J. S. (2002). Equilibrium and evolutionary foundations of competition and technology policy: New perspectives on the division of labour and the innovation process. CRIC Working Papers series, University of Manchester.Miettinen, R. (1999). The riddle of things. Activity theory and actor network theory as approaches of studying innovations. Mind, Culture and Activity, 6, 170–195.Molas-Gallart, J., & Davies, A. (2006). Toward theory-led evaluation: The experience of European science, technology, and innovation policies. American Journal of Evaluation, 27, 64–82.Mytelka, L. K., & Smith, K. (2002). Policy learning and innovation theory: An interactive and co-evolving process. Research Policy, 31, 1467–1479.Olazarán, M., Lavía, C., & Otero, B. (2004). ¿Hacia una segunda transición en la ciencia? Política científica y grupos de investigación. Revista Española de Sociología, 4, 143–172.Potts, J. (2007). The innovation system & economic evolution. Productivity commission submission, public support for science & innovation, productivity commission, Camberra.Ray, S., & Desli, E. (1997). Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries: Comment. American Economic Review, 87(5), 1033–1039.Rip, A., & Nederhof, A. J. (1986). Between dirigism and laissez-faire: Effects of implementing the science policy priority for biotechnology in the Netherlands. Research Policy, 15, 253–268.Schmidt, E. K., Graversen, E. K., & Langberg, K. (2003). Innovation and dynamics in public research environments in Denmark: A research-policy perspective. Science and Public Policy, 30, 107–116.Schmoch, U., & Schubert, T. (2009). Sustainability of incentives for excellent research—The German case. Scientometrics, 81(1), 195–218.Shephard, R. (1970). Theory of cost and production functions. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Simar, L., & Wilson, P. W. (1998). Productivity growth in industrialized countries. Discussion paper 9810, Universite Catholique de Louvain, Belgium.Van Raan, A. F. J. (2000). R&D evaluation at the beginning of the new century. Research Evaluation, 8, 81–86.Zofio, J. L. (2007). Malmquist productivity index decompositions: A unifying framework. Applied Economics, 39, 2371–2387.Zofio, J. L., & Lovell, C. A. K. (1998). Yet another Malmquist productivity index decomposition. Working paper, Department of Economics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.Zofio, J. L., & Lovell, C. A. K. (2001). Graph efficiency and productivity measures: An application to US agriculture. Applied Economics, 33(10), 1433–1442.Zofio, J. L., & Prieto, A. M. (2006). Return to dollar, generalized distance function and the Fisher productivity index. Spanish Economic Review, 8, 113–138

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an internet intervention for family caregivers of people with dementia: design of a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The number of people with dementia is rising rapidly as a consequence of the greying of the world population. There is an urgent need to develop cost effective approaches that meet the needs of people with dementia and their family caregivers. Depression, feelings of burden and caregiver stress are common and serious health problems in these family caregivers. Different kinds of interventions are developed to prevent or reduce the negative psychological consequences of caregiving. The use of internet interventions is still very limited, although they may be a cost effective way to support family caregivers in an earlier stage and diminish their psychological distress in the short and longer run.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>A pragmatic randomized controlled trial is designed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ‘Mastery over Dementia’, an internet intervention for caregivers of people with dementia. The intervention aims at prevention and decrease of psychological distress, in particular depressive symptoms. The experimental condition consists of an internet course with 8 sessions and a booster session over a maximum period of 6 months guided by a psychologist. Caregivers in the comparison condition receive a minimal intervention. In addition to a pre and post measurement, an intermediate measurement will be conducted. In addition, there will be two follow-up measurements 3 and 6 months after post-treatment in the experimental group only. To study the effectiveness of the intervention, depressive symptoms are used as the primary outcome, whereas symptoms of anxiety, role overload and caregiver perceived stress are used as secondary outcomes. To study which caregivers profit most of the internet intervention, several variables that may modify the impact of the intervention are taken into account. Regarding the cost-effectiveness, an economic evaluation will be conducted from a societal perspective.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study will provide evidence about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an internet intervention for caregivers. If both can be shown, this might set the stage for the development of a range of internet interventions in the field of caregiving for people with dementia. This is even more important because future generations of caregivers will be more familiar with the use of internet.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>NTR-2051/RCT-DDB</p

Neurocognitive Dysfunction in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Association with Antiphospholipid Antibodies, Disease Activity and Chronic Damage

Introduction: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is characterized by frequent neuropsychiatric involvement, which includes cognitive impairment (CI). We aimed at assessing CI in a cohort of Italian SLE patients by using a wide range of neurocognitive tests specifically designed to evaluate the fronto-subcortical dysfunction. Furthermore, we aimed at testing whether CI in SLE is associated with serum autoantibodies, disease activity and chronic damage. Methods: Fifty-eight consecutive patients were enrolled. Study protocol included data collection, evaluation of serum level

The effect of regular walks on various health aspects in older people with dementia: protocol of a randomized-controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Physical activity has proven to be beneficial for physical functioning, cognition, depression, anxiety, rest-activity rhythm, quality of life (QoL), activities of daily living (ADL) and pain in older people. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of walking regularly on physical functioning, the progressive cognitive decline, level of depression, anxiety, rest-activity rhythm, QoL, ADL and pain in older people with dementia.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>This study is a longitudinal randomized controlled, single blind study. Ambulatory older people with dementia, who are regular visitors of daily care or living in a home for the elderly or nursing home in the Netherlands, will be randomly allocated to the experimental or control condition. Participants of the experimental group make supervised walks of 30 minutes a day, 5 days a week, as part of their daily nursing care. Participants of the control group will come together three times a week for tea or other sedentary activities to control for possible positive effects of social interaction. All dependent variables will be assessed at baseline and after 6 weeks, and 3, 6, 9, 12 and 18 months of intervention.</p> <p>The dependent variables include neuropsychological tests to assess cognition, physical tests to determine physical functioning, questionnaires to assess ADL, QoL, level of depression and anxiety, actigraphy to assess rest-activity rhythm and pain scales to determine pain levels. Potential moderating variables at baseline are: socio-demographic characteristics, body mass index, subtype of dementia, apolipoprotein E (ApoE) genotype, medication use and comorbidities.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study evaluates the effect of regular walking as a treatment for older people with dementia. The strength of this study is that 1) it has a longitudinal design with multiple repeated measurements, 2) we assess many different health aspects, 3) the intervention is not performed by research staff, but by nursing staff which enables it to become a routine in usual care. Possible limitations of the study are that 1) only active minded institutions are willing to participate creating a selection bias, 2) the drop-out rate will be high in this population, 3) not all participants will be able to perform/understand all tests.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1482">NTR1482</a></p