Home › Research › Prevention trials
Change in CAIDE Dementia Risk Score and Neuroimaging Biomarkers During a 2-Year Multidomain Lifestyle Randomized Controlled Trial: Results of a Post-Hoc Subgroup Analysis
Stephen R, Ngandu T, Liu Y, Peltonen M, Antikainen R, Kemppainen N, Laatikainen T, Lötjönen J et al.. The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2021-07-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The CAIDE (Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging and Dementia) Risk Score is a validated tool estimating dementia risk. It was previously associated with imaging biomarkers. However, associations between dementia risk scores (including CAIDE) and dementia-related biomarkers have not been studied in the context of an intervention. This study investigated associations between change in CAIDE score and change in neuroimaging biomarkers (brain magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] and Pittsburgh Compound B-positron emission tomography [PiB-PET] measures) during the 2-year Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER) (post-hoc analyses). FINGER targeted at-risk older adults, aged 60-77 years, from the general population. Participants were randomized to either multidomain intervention (diet, exercise, cognitive training, and vascular risk management) or control group (general health advice). Neuroimaging (MRI and PiB-PET) data from baseline and 2-year visits were used. A toal of 112 participants had repeated brain MRI measures (hippocampal, total gray matter, and white matter lesion volumes, and Alzheimer's disease signature cortical thickness). Repeated PiB-PET scans were available for 39 participants. Reduction in CAIDE score (indicating lower dementia risk) during the intervention was associated with less decline in hippocampus volume in the intervention group, but not the control group (Randomization group × CAIDE change interaction β coefficient = -0.40, p = .02). Associations for other neuroimaging measures were not significant. The intervention may have benefits on hippocampal volume in individuals who succeed in improving their overall risk level as indicated by a reduction in CAIDE score. This exploratory finding requires further testing and validation in larger studies.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Stephen, R., Ngandu, T., Liu, Y., Peltonen, M., Antikainen, R., Kemppainen, N., et al. (2021). Change in CAIDE Dementia Risk Score and Neuroimaging Biomarkers During a 2-Year Multidomain Lifestyle Randomized Controlled Trial: Results of a Post-Hoc Subgroup Analysis. The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glab130
Vancouver
Stephen R, Ngandu T, Liu Y, Peltonen M, Antikainen R, Kemppainen N, et al. Change in CAIDE Dementia Risk Score and Neuroimaging Biomarkers During a 2-Year Multidomain Lifestyle Randomized Controlled Trial: Results of a Post-Hoc Subgroup Analysis. The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences. 2021. doi:10.1093/gerona/glab130. PMID: 33970268.
BibTeX
@article{stephen2021-33970268,
author = {Stephen, R. and Ngandu, T. and Liu, Y. and Peltonen, M. and Antikainen, R. and Kemppainen, N. and Laatikainen, T. and Lötjönen, J. and others},
title = {{Change in CAIDE Dementia Risk Score and Neuroimaging Biomarkers During a 2-Year Multidomain Lifestyle Randomized Controlled Trial: Results of a Post-Hoc Subgroup Analysis}},
journal = {The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1093/gerona/glab130},
pmid = {33970268},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glab130}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- It was previously associated with imaging biomarkers.
- Reduction in CAIDE score (indicating lower dementia risk) during the intervention was associated with less decline in hippocampus volume in the intervention group, but not the control group (Randomization group × CAIDE change interaction β coefficient = -0.40, p = .02).
- Associations for other neuroimaging measures were not significant.
- The intervention may have benefits on hippocampal volume in individuals who succeed in improving their overall risk level as indicated by a reduction in CAIDE score.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Study designpost-hoc analysis
- Participants112
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 79/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomized controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 46 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 79 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomized controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”) |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 112 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 1 / 2 | Randomized (as stated in the record) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 33970268) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 46 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 46 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 79 out of 100. |
| Total | 79 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Prevention trials
Also tagged “prevalence”
1,223 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,223 tagged studies.