Amyloid and tau pathology associations with personality traits, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and cognitive lifestyle in the preclinical phases of sporadic and autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease

Background Major prevention trials for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are now focusing on multidomain lifestyle interventions. However, the exact combination of behavioral factors related to AD pathology remains unclear. In 2 cohorts of cognitively unimpaired individuals at risk of AD, we examined which combinations of personality traits, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and cognitive lifestyle (years of education or lifetime cognitive activity) related to the pathological hallmarks of AD, amyloid-β, and tau deposits. Methods A total of 115 older adults with a parental or multiple-sibling family history of sporadic AD (PREVENT-AD [PRe-symptomatic EValuation of Experimental or Novel Treatments for AD] cohort) underwent amyloid and tau positron emission tomography and answered several questionnaires related to behavioral attributes. Separately, we studied 117 mutation carriers from the DIAN (Dominant Inherited Alzheimer Network) study group cohort with amyloid positron emission tomography and behavioral data. Using partial least squares analysis, we identified latent variables relating amyloid or tau pathology with combinations of personality traits, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and cognitive lifestyle. Results In PREVENT-AD, lower neuroticism, neuropsychiatric burden, and higher education were associated with less amyloid deposition (p = .014). Lower neuroticism and neuropsychiatric features, along with higher measures of openness and extraversion, were related to less tau deposition (p = .006). In DIAN, lower neuropsychiatric burden and higher education were also associated with less amyloid (p = .005). The combination of these factors accounted for up to 14% of AD pathology. Conclusions In the preclinical phase of both sporadic and autosomal dominant AD, multiple behavioral features were associated with AD pathology. These results may suggest potential pathways by which multidomain interventions might help delay AD onset or progression

In situ revascularization with rifampicin-soaked silver polyester graft for aortic infection: Results of a retrospective monocentric series of 18 cases

International audienc

Meta-analysis of individual-patient data from EVAR-1, DREAM, OVER and ACE trials comparing outcomes of endovascular or open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm over 5 years.

BACKGROUND: The erosion of the early mortality advantage of elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains without a satisfactory explanation. METHODS: An individual-patient data meta-analysis of four multicentre randomized trials of EVAR versus open repair was conducted to a prespecified analysis plan, reporting on mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and reintervention. RESULTS: The analysis included 2783 patients, with 14 245 person-years of follow-up (median 5·5 years). Early (0-6 months after randomization) mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (46 of 1393 versus 73 of 1390 deaths; pooled hazard ratio 0·61, 95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 0·89; P = 0·010), primarily because 30-day operative mortality was lower in the EVAR groups (16 deaths versus 40 for open repair; pooled odds ratio 0·40, 95 per cent c.i. 0·22 to 0·74). Later (within 3 years) the survival curves converged, remaining converged to 8 years. Beyond 3 years, aneurysm-related mortality was significantly higher in the EVAR groups (19 deaths versus 3 for open repair; pooled hazard ratio 5·16, 1·49 to 17·89; P = 0·010). Patients with moderate renal dysfunction or previous coronary artery disease had no early survival advantage under EVAR. Those with peripheral artery disease had lower mortality under open repair (39 deaths versus 62 for EVAR; P = 0·022) in the period from 6 months to 4 years after randomization. CONCLUSION: The early survival advantage in the EVAR group, and its subsequent erosion, were confirmed. Over 5 years, patients of marginal fitness had no early survival advantage from EVAR compared with open repair. Aneurysm-related mortality and patients with low ankle : brachial pressure index contributed to the erosion of the early survival advantage for the EVAR group. Trial registration numbers: EVAR-1, ISRCTN55703451; DREAM (Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management), NCT00421330; ACE (Anévrysme de l'aorte abdominale, Chirurgie versus Endoprothèse), NCT00224718; OVER (Open Versus Endovascular Repair Trial for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms), NCT00094575