Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Deep and Frequent Phenotyping study protocol: an observational study in prodromal Alzheimer's disease
Koychev I, Lawson J, Chessell T, Mackay C, Gunn R, Sahakian B, Rowe JB, Thomas AJ et al.. BMJ open, 2019-03-23
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Introduction Recent failures of potential novel therapeutics for Alzheimer's disease (AD) have prompted a drive towards clinical studies in prodromal or preclinical states. However, carrying out clinical trials in early disease stages is extremely challenging-a key reason being the unfeasibility of using classical outcome measures of dementia trials (eg, conversion to dementia) and the lack of validated surrogate measures so early in the disease process. The Deep and Frequent Phenotyping (DFP) study aims to resolve this issue by identifying a set of markers acting as indicators of disease progression in the prodromal phase of disease that could be used as indicative outcome measures in proof-of-concept trials. Methods and analysis The DFP study is a repeated measures observational study where participants will be recruited through existing parent cohorts, research interested lists/databases, advertisements and memory clinics. Repeated measures of both established (cognition, positron emission tomography (PET) imaging or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) markers of pathology, structural MRI markers of neurodegeneration) and experimental modalities (functional MRI, magnetoencephalography and/or electroencephalography, gait measurement, ophthalmological and continuous smartphone-based cognitive and other assessments together with experimental CSF, blood, tear and saliva biomarkers) will be performed. We will be recruiting male and female participants aged >60 years with prodromal AD, defined as absence of dementia but with evidence of cognitive impairment together with AD pathology as assessed using PET imaging or CSF biomarkers. Control participants without evidence of AD pathology will be included at a 1:4 ratio. Ethics and dissemination The study gained favourable ethical opinion from the South Central-Oxford B NHS Research Ethics Committee (REC reference 17/SC/0315; approved on 18 August 2017; amendment 13 February 2018). Data will be shared with the scientific community no more than 1 year following completion of study and data assembly.
Key findings
- Repeated measures of both established (cognition, positron emission tomography (PET) imaging or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) markers of pathology, structural MRI markers of neurodegeneration) and experimental modalities (functional MRI, magnetoencephalography and/or electroencephalography, gait measurement, ophthalmological and continuous smartphone-based cognitive and other assessments together with experimental CSF, blood, tear and saliva biomarkers) will be performed.
- We will be recruiting male and female participants aged >60 years with prodromal AD, defined as absence of dementia but with evidence of cognitive impairment together with AD pathology as assessed using PET imaging or CSF biomarkers.
- Control participants without evidence of AD pathology will be included at a 1:4 ratio.
- Ethics and dissemination The study gained favourable ethical opinion from the South Central-Oxford B NHS Research Ethics Committee (REC reference 17/SC/0315; approved on 18 August 2017; amendment 13 February 2018).
- Data will be shared with the scientific community no more than 1 year following completion of study and data assembly.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded 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 multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMJ open) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30904851) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 24 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Koychev, I., Lawson, J., Chessell, T., Mackay, C., Gunn, R., Sahakian, B., et al. (2019). Deep and Frequent Phenotyping study protocol: an observational study in prodromal Alzheimer's disease. BMJ open. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024498
Vancouver
Koychev I, Lawson J, Chessell T, Mackay C, Gunn R, Sahakian B, et al. Deep and Frequent Phenotyping study protocol: an observational study in prodromal Alzheimer's disease. BMJ open. 2019. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024498. PMID: 30904851.
BibTeX
@article{koychev2019-30904851,
author = {Koychev, I. and Lawson, J. and Chessell, T. and Mackay, C. and Gunn, R. and Sahakian, B. and Rowe, J. B. and Thomas, A. J. and others},
title = {{Deep and Frequent Phenotyping study protocol: an observational study in prodromal Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {BMJ open},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024498},
pmid = {30904851},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024498}
}