Abstract
Background Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDRSOB) scale is known to be highly indicative of cognitive-functional status, but it is unclear whether it is consistent with clinical diagnosis in evaluating drug class associations with risk of progression to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia.
Methods We employed multivariable logistic regression on longitudinal NACC data, to identify drug classes associated with disease progression risk, using clinical diagnosis and CDRSOB as the outcome.
Results Anticoagulants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antihypertensives, antidepressants, and Parkinson’s medications were significantly associated with decreased progression to mild cognitive impairment (MCI)/dementia, and antipsychotics, antidiabetics, hypolipidemic drugs, and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) medications were significantly associated with increased progression risk. Associations were however dependant on the diagnostic measure used, e.g., levodopa was associated with reduced MCI-to-AD risk using CDRSOB as the outcome (OR:0.28, FDR p<0.002), but not with clinical diagnosis. Additionally, some associations appear to be gender specific; for instance, antiadrenergic agents had lower MCI-to-Dementia risk only for men (OR:0.67, FDR p<0.001) using CDRSOB.
Conclusions Overall, we demonstrate that choice of diagnostic measure can influence the magnitude and significance of risk or protection attributed to drug classes. A consensus must be reached within the research community with respect to the most accurate diagnostic outcome to identify risk and improve reproducibility.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This project was supported by the European Unions INTERREG VA Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body with additional support by the Northern Ireland Functional Brain Mapping Project Facility funded by invest Northern Ireland and the University of Ulster ARUK NI Pump Priming and Ulster University Research Challenge Fund and the Dr George Moore Endowment for Data Science at Ulster University
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
NA
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding: This work was supported by the European Union’s INTERREG VA Programme, managed by the Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB (Centre for Personalised Medicine, IVA 5036)), with additional support by the Northern Ireland Functional Brain Mapping Project Facility (1303/101154803), funded by invest Northern Ireland and the University of Ulster (K.W.-L.), Alzheimer’s Research UK (ARUK) NI Pump Priming (M.B.,S.T.,K.W.-L.,P.L.M.), Ulster University Research Challenge Fund (M.B.,S.T.,K.W.-L.,M.B.), and the Dr George Moore Endowment for Data Science at Ulster University (M.B.).
Ph: +44 (0) 2871675675
Ph: +44 (0) 2871675320
Ph: +353-91-495586
Ph: +44 (0) 2871345171
Declarations of interest: none
Methods section updated to adjust for important confounders; Accordingly the Results section is updated; All figures updated; Supplemental files updated.
Data Availability
The processed data can be found in the results section in the manuscript and Supplementary Table. R codes for data preparation and analysis will be uploaded to GitHub in due course. Data source: NACC asks investigators to not share the data with individuals who are not collaborators on the project for which the data was requested. This is partially due to the fact that they have distinctions between commercial and noncommercial recipients in place due to the option for NACC participants to elect to decline sharing of their data with commercial entities. Additionally, NACC has a data use agreement in place to help prevent misuse of the data. Lastly, this is helpful in the tracking of proposals, publications and data requests. NACC data is available through request to any interested researcher regardless of commerciality. At the time of the request submission, investigators will be asked to provide details of the proposal and will need to submit a data use agreement. Requests can be submitted on the website (https://naccdata.org/requesting-data/submit-data-request).
