Perspectives on the diagnosis and management of functional cognitive disorder: An international Delphi study

Background: Current proposed criteria for functional cognitive disorder (FCD) have not been externally validated. We sought to analyse the current perspectives of cognitive specialists in the diagnosis and management of FCD in comparison with neurodegenerative conditions. Methods: International experts in cognitive disorders were invited to assess seven illustrative clinical vignettes containing history and bedside characteristics alone. Participants assigned a probable diagnosis and selected the appropriate investigation and treatment. Qualitative, quantitative and inter‐rater agreement analyses were undertaken. Results: Eighteen diagnostic terminologies were assigned by 45 cognitive experts from 12 countries with a median of 13 years of experience, across the seven scenarios. Accurate discrimination between FCD and neurodegeneration was observed, independently of background and years of experience: 100% of the neurodegenerative vignettes were correctly classified and 75%–88% of the FCD diagnoses were attributed to non‐neurodegenerative causes. There was <50% agreement in the terminology used for FCD, in comparison with 87%–92% agreement for neurodegenerative syndromes. Blood tests and neuropsychological evaluation were the leading diagnostic modalities for FCD. Diagnostic communication, psychotherapy and psychiatry referral were the main suggested management strategies in FCD. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of distinguishing between FCD and neurodegeneration based on relevant patient characteristics and history details. These characteristics need further validation and operationalisation. Heterogeneous labelling and framing pose clinical and research challenges reflecting a lack of agreement in the field. Careful consideration of FCD diagnosis is advised, particularly in the presence of comorbidities. This study informs future research on diagnostic tools and evidence‐based interventions

Perspectives on the diagnosis and management of functional cognitive disorder: An international Delphi study

Background: Current proposed criteria for functional cognitive disorder (FCD) have not been externally validated. We sought to analyse the current perspectives of cognitive specialists in the diagnosis and management of FCD in comparison with neurodegenerative conditions. Methods: International experts in cognitive disorders were invited to assess seven illustrative clinical vignettes containing history and bedside characteristics alone. Participants assigned a probable diagnosis and selected the appropriate investigation and treatment. Qualitative, quantitative and inter-rater agreement analyses were undertaken. Results: Eighteen diagnostic terminologies were assigned by 45 cognitive experts from 12 countries with a median of 13 years of experience, across the seven scenarios. Accurate discrimination between FCD and neurodegeneration was observed, independently of background and years of experience: 100% of the neurodegenerative vignettes were correctly classified and 75%–88% of the FCD diagnoses were attributed to non-neurodegenerative causes. There was <50% agreement in the terminology used for FCD, in comparison with 87%–92% agreement for neurodegenerative syndromes. Blood tests and neuropsychological evaluation were the leading diagnostic modalities for FCD. Diagnostic communication, psychotherapy and psychiatry referral were the main suggested management strategies in FCD. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of distinguishing between FCD and neurodegeneration based on relevant patient characteristics and history details. These characteristics need further validation and operationalisation. Heterogeneous labelling and framing pose clinical and research challenges reflecting a lack of agreement in the field. Careful consideration of FCD diagnosis is advised, particularly in the presence of comorbidities. This study informs future research on diagnostic tools and evidence-based interventions

Data_Sheet_1_Modifiable dementia risk factors and AT(N) biomarkers: findings from the EPAD cohort.docx

IntroductionModifiable risk factors account for a substantial proportion of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) cases and we currently have a discrete AT(N) biomarker profile for AD biomarkers: amyloid (A), p-tau (T), and neurodegeneration (N). Here, we investigated how modifiable risk factors relate to the three hallmark AT(N) biomarkers of AD.MethodsParticipants from the European Prevention of Alzheimer’s Dementia (EPAD) study underwent clinical assessments, brain magnetic resonance imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid collection and analysis. Generalized additive models (GAMs) with penalized regression splines were modeled in the AD Workbench on the NTKApp.ResultsA total of 1,434 participants were included (56% women, 39% APOE ε4+) with an average age of 65.5 (± 7.2) years. We found that modifiable risk factors of less education (t = 3.9, p DiscussionThis cross-sectional study provides further support for modifiable risk factors displaying neuroprotective associations with the characteristic AT(N) biomarkers of AD.</p

Computational approaches for understanding the diagnosis and treatment of Parkinson's disease

This study describes how the application of evolutionary algorithms (EAs) can be used to study motor function in humans with Parkinson’s disease (PD) and in animal models of PD. Human data is obtained using commercially available sensors via a range of non-invasive procedures that follow conventional clinical practice. EAs can then be used to classify human data for a range of uses, including diagnosis and disease monitoring. New results are presented that demonstrate how EAs can also be used to classify fruit flies with and without genetic mutations that cause Parkinson’s by using measurements of the proboscis extension reflex. The case is made for a computational approach that can be applied across human and animal studies of PD and lays the way for evaluation of existing and new drug therapies in a truly objective way