Progress toward standardized diagnosis of vascular cognitive impairment: Guidelines from the Vascular Impairment of Cognition Classification Consensus Study

INTRODUCTION: Progress in understanding and management of vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) has been hampered by lack of consensus on diagnosis, reflecting the use of multiple different assessment protocols. A large multinational group of clinicians and researchers participated in a two-phase Vascular Impairment of Cognition Classification Consensus Study (VICCCS) to agree on principles (VICCCS-1) and protocols (VICCCS-2) for diagnosis of VCI. We present VICCCS-2. METHODS: We used VICCCS-1 principles and published diagnostic guidelines as points of reference for an online Delphi survey aimed at achieving consensus on clinical diagnosis of VCI. RESULTS: Six survey rounds comprising 65-79 participants agreed guidelines for diagnosis of VICCCS-revised mild and major forms of VCI and endorsed the National Institute of Neurological Disorders-Canadian Stroke Network neuropsychological assessment protocols and recommendations for imaging. DISCUSSION: The VICCCS-2 suggests standardized use of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders-Canadian Stroke Network recommendations on neuropsychological and imaging assessment for diagnosis of VCI so as to promote research collaboration

The Vascular Impairment of Cognition Classification Consensus Study

Introduction Numerous diagnostic criteria have tried to tackle the variability in clinical manifestations and problematic diagnosis of vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) but none have been universally accepted. These criteria have not been readily comparable, impacting on clinical diagnosis rates and in turn prevalence estimates, research, and treatment. Methods The Vascular Impairment of Cognition Classification Consensus Study (VICCCS) involved participants (81% academic researchers) from 27 countries in an online Delphi consensus study. Participants reviewed previously proposed concepts to develop new guidelines. Results VICCCS had a mean of 122 (98–153) respondents across the study and a 67% threshold to represent consensus. VICCCS redefined VCI including classification of mild and major forms of VCI and subtypes. It proposes new standardized VCI-associated terminology and future research priorities to address gaps in current knowledge. Discussion VICCCS proposes a consensus-based updated conceptualization of VCI intended to facilitate standardization in research

Long-term effectiveness of dopamine agonists and monoamine oxidase B inhibitors compared with levodopa as initial treatment for Parkinson\u27s disease (PD MED): A large, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial

\ua9 2014 Elsevier Ltd. Background Whether initial treatment for Parkinson\u27s disease should consist of levodopa, dopamine agonists, or monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors (MAOBI) is uncertain. We aimed to establish which of these three classes of drug, as initial treatment, provides the most effective long-term control of symptoms and best quality of life for people with early Parkinson\u27s disease. Methods In this pragmatic, open-label randomised trial, patients newly diagnosed with Parkinson\u27s disease were randomly assigned (by telephone call to a central office; 1:1:1) between levodopa-sparing therapy (dopamine agonists or MAOBI) and levodopa alone. Patients and investigators were not masked to group assignment. Primary outcomes were the mobility dimension on the 39-item patient-rated Parkinson\u27s disease questionnaire (PDQ-39) quality-of-life scale (range 0-100 with six points defined as the minimally important difference) and cost-effectiveness. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN69812316. Findings Between Nov 9, 2000, and Dec 22, 2009, 1620 patients were assigned to study groups (528 to levodopa, 632 to dopamine agonist, 460 to MAOBI). With 3-year median follow-up, PDQ-39 mobility scores averaged 1\ub78 points (95% CI 0\ub75-3\ub70, p=0\ub7005) better in patients randomly assigned to levodopa than those assigned to levodopa-sparing therapy, with no increase or attrition of benefit during 7 years\u27 observation. PDQ-39 mobility scores were 1\ub74 points (95% CI 0\ub70-2\ub79, p=0\ub705) better in patients allocated MAOBI than in those allocated dopamine agonists. EQ-5D utility scores averaged 0\ub703 (95% CI 0\ub701-0\ub705; p=0\ub70002) better with levodopa than with levodopa-sparing therapy; rates of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 0\ub781, 95% CI 0\ub761-1\ub708, p=0\ub714), admissions to institutions (0\ub786, 0\ub763-1\ub718; p=0\ub74), and death (0\ub785, 0\ub769-1\ub706, p=0\ub717) were not significantly different, but the upper CIs precluded any substantial increase with levodopa compared with levodopa-sparing therapy. 179 (28%) of 632 patients allocated dopamine agonists and 104 (23%) of 460 patients allocated MAOBI discontinued allocated treatment because of side-effects compared with 11 (2%) of 528 patients allocated levodopa (p<0\ub70001). Interpretation Very small but persistent benefits are shown for patient-rated mobility scores when treatment is initiated with levodopa compared with levodopa-sparing therapy. MAOBI as initial levodopa-sparing therapy was at least as effective as dopamine agonists. Funding UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme and UK Department of Health

The Vascular Impairment of Cognition Classification Consensus Study

Numerous diagnostic criteria have tried to tackle the variability in clinical manifestations and problematic diagnosis of vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) but none have been universally accepted. These criteria have not been readily comparable, impacting on clinical diagnosis rates and in turn prevalence estimates, research, and treatment