Boots, Elizabeth A.

Abstract Introduction Remote cognitive assessments offer an accessible, scalable way to support clinical characterization and longitudinal monitoring of cognition. This study evaluates the feasibility of implementing Mayo Test Drive (MTD), a remote, self-administered digital cognitive assessment, within a specialized clinic focused on eligibility assessments for anti-amyloid therapies for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Method Two-hundred and nine ( N =209) patients (M age =71.2, 53% female) were evaluated through the Mayo Clinic Rochester Alzheimer’s Disease Treatment Clinic (ADTC) and had the opportunity to complete MTD, either as a remote, patient-initiated session through a patient-facing healthcare portal or during an in-clinic neuropsychological evaluation. Results Clinical diagnoses included 55.2% mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 31.0% mild dementia, and 11.6% moderate dementia, in addition to 2.2% cognitively unimpaired (CU), as determined by neurology consensus at a multidisciplinary case conference. Among those who initiated MTD ( n =197/209), 97.5% completed a session (70.6% remotely, 26.9% in clinic). Completion rates were high across diagnostic groups and did not significantly differ by clinical severity ( p =.12): CU (100%), MCI (99.1%), mild dementia (97.0%), and moderate dementia (89.5%). Remote completion rates overall were high (97.9%). Among completers, administration setting (remote vs. in-clinic) did not significantly differ by clinical stage, χ²(3)=2.37, p =.49. Reasons for non-initiation included not receiving or opening portal messages and other/unknown factors. Discussion Remote digital cognitive assessment is feasible within the context of clinic eligibility evaluations for AD therapies. The high completion rates of MTD across clinical impairment levels in this setting support development of paths for broader use in cognitive characterization in AD care.

Background Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) represents a critical window for both pharmacological therapies and non-pharmacological interventions to delay cognitive decline. Objective To evaluate whether combining pharmacotherapy with multicomponent behavioral interventions enhances outcomes relative to behavioral interventions alone. Methods The sample included people with MCI (pwMCI) of any etiology who completed the HABIT Healthy Action to Benefit Independence & Thinking ® program. Baseline pharmacotherapy (acetylcholinesterase inhibitor and/or glutamate regulators) use was dichotomized (yes/no). Multivariate linear mixed-effects models examined changes from baseline in care partner-reported everyday functional skills, quality of life, self-efficacy, anxiety, depression, and HABIT compliance at post-intervention, 6 months, and 12 months, adjusting for baseline cognitive impairment severity and relevant demographic covariates. Results Among 1074 pwMCI, 413 (38.5%) were receiving pharmacotherapy at baseline. Pharmacotherapy use was more prevalent among White than non-White participants (39.4% versus 23.3%, p = 0.01). At baseline, pharmacotherapy users had more severe cognitive impairment and lower utilization of rehabilitation strategies (all p < 0.05). Both groups demonstrated significant improvements across all outcomes at post-intervention. During follow-up (mean score change compared to baseline), pharmacotherapy users showed greater increases in HABIT compliance at 6 months (3.2 versus 2.0) and 12 months (2.1 versus 1.4). In contrast, by 12 months, pharmacotherapy users experienced greater worsening of everyday functional skills related to memory (−2.1 versus −1.3) and executive function (−5.8 versus-3.7). Conclusions pwMCI undergoing pharmacotherapy entered the HABIT program with more advanced cognitive impairment. The pharmacotherapy was not associated with greater intervention-related benefit or attenuation of long-term cognitive decline.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Multicomponent non‐pharmacological interventions, such as the HABIT Healthy Action to Benefit Independence & Thinking® program, have shown promise for improving emotional well‐being, functioning, and self‐efficacy in both people with mild cognitive impairment (pwMCI) and their care partners. However, limited research has examined whether outcomes differ based on type of care partner who co‐enrolls with the pwMCI. METHODS We analyzed data from 875 pwMCI−care partner dyads who completed the HABIT program. Multivariate linear mixed‐effects regression models evaluated changes from baseline in outcomes by care partner type (spouse vs. non‐spouse) at post‐intervention, 6‐months, and 12‐ months. RESULTS At post‐intervention, pwMCI with spousal care partners demonstrated significant improvements across all outcomes from baseline, whereas those with non‐spousal partners improved in five out of seven outcomes. Across subsequent follow‐ups, pwMCI with spousal care partners showed sustained mean reductions in anxiety (post‐intervention: −2.0; 12‐month: −0.9) and increased compliance (post‐intervention: 5.7; 12‐month: 0.9). Everyday functioning in memory (post‐intervention: −0.9; 12‐months: 1.8) and executive functioning (post‐intervention: −0.7; 12‐months: 4.8) improved at post‐intervention but declined thereafter. Spousal care partners reported reduced anxiety (−1.2) and depression (−1.3) at post‐intervention, but by 12‐months they experienced increased burden, anxiety, and depression relative to baseline. Non‐spousal pwMCI–care partner dyads did not show significant change at 6 or 12‐months. DISCUSSION The HABIT intervention may have more favorable outcomes for pwMCI and care partners in spousal compared to non‐spousal dyads. These findings highlight the potential impact of care partner characteristics on both immediate and long‐term response to behavioral interventions for MCI. Highlights At post‐intervention, people with mild cognitive impairment (pwMCI) with spousal care partners showed significant improvements across all outcomes, while those with non‐spousal partners improved in five of seven outcomes. Gains attenuated over time for both spousal and non‐spousal dyads Spousal care partners reported reduced anxiety and depression at post‐intervention, but by 12 months they experienced increased burden, anxiety, and depression relative to baseline. Non‐spousal pwMCI–care partner dyads did not show significant change at 6 or 12 months.

Abstract Objective: We investigated differences in cognition between variants of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) including PSP-Richardson (PSP-RS) and subcortical and cortical variants using updated diagnostic criteria and comprehensive neuropsychological assessment. Method: We recruited 140 participants with PSP (age = 71.3 ± 6.9 years; education = 15.0 ± 2.8 years; 49.3% female) who completed neurological and neuropsychological assessment. Participants received diagnoses of PSP clinical variants at their evaluation (or retrospectively if evaluated before 2017) according to the Movement Disorder Society PSP criteria. We grouped variants as PSP-RS (62 participants), PSP-Cortical (25 with PSP-speech/language and 9 with PSP-corticobasal syndrome), and PSP-Subcortical (27 with PSP-parkinsonism, 11 with PSP-progressive gait freezing, and 6 with PSP-postural instability). Analysis of covariance adjusted for age assessed for differences in neuropsychological performance between variants across cognitive domains. Results: PSP-Cortical participants performed worst on measures of visual attention/working memory (Spatial Span Forward/Backward/Total), executive function (Frontal Assessment Battery), and language (Letter Fluency). PSP-RS participants performed worst on verbal memory (Camden Words). There were no significant group differences for the MoCA or indices of visuospatial function. There were no sex or education differences between PSP groups; however, there were differences in age at visit and disease duration. Conclusions: In a large sample of participants with PSP, there were differences in cognition across PSP-RS, PSP-Subcortical, and PSP-Cortical variants, with PSP-Cortical and, to a lesser extent, PSP-RS, performing worse on tests of attention and executive function. These findings suggest cognitive distinctions among PSP clinical variants and highlight the value of neuropsychological assessment in differential diagnosis of PSP subtypes for more accurate and timely clinical classification.

AbstractBackgroundMayo Test DRIVE (MTD): Test Development through Rapid Iteration, Validation and Expansion, is a web‐based multi‐device (smartphone, tablet, personal computer) platform optimized for remote self‐administered cognitive assessment that includes a computer‐adaptive word list memory test (Stricker Learning Span; SLS), a measure of processing speed/executive functioning (Symbols Test) and a score combining both the memory and processing speed/executive functioning measures (MTD Composite). We aimed to determine the reliability of MTD measures across follow‐up sessions.MethodIndividuals participating in this ancillary study who completed at least two and up to four complete MTD sessions were included, resulting in 1,293 participants (mean age = 70.6, SD = 11.6; mean education = 15.6, SD = 2.3; 48.6% male; 96.9% White; 99.1% non‐Hispanic; 97.1% cognitively unimpaired) from parent studies (see Table 1). MTD raw scores were winsorized at 1% and 99% to minimize the impact of outliers. Test‐retest reliability was assessed using single‐rating, absolute‐agreement, and two‐way mixed ICCs and results are described using descriptives from Koo et al. (2016). ICCs for in‐person‐administered traditional neuropsychological measures are also reported alongside MTD for a subset of participants newly enrolled into the MCSA (to ensure participants were test naïve to both MTD and in‐person tests).ResultReliability was good for the MTD Composite raw [total ICC = 0.78; see Table 2 for session‐to‐session ICCs and 95% CIs], and moderate‐to‐good for the primary outcome variables for each subtest [total ICC = 0.74 for both SLS and Symbols]. Weighting by accuracy negatively impacted reliability of Symbols and the Composite; without this weighting, MTD Composite and Symbols variables showed higher reliability (MTD Composite z total ICC = 0.80; Symbols response time total ICC = 0.84; see Table 2). Alternative methods of defining response time on Symbols showed nearly identical reliability values. SLS sum of trials (primary variable) had subtly higher reliability than separate measures of learning (1‐5 correct, max span) or delay. Reliability of remote MTD and in‐person‐administered measures and select comparisons are provided in Table 3.ConclusionMTD showed moderate to good reliability, similar to in‐person‐administered traditional neuropsychological tests. Future work will examine the effect of demographics, device type, and session interference on reliability.

AbstractBackgroundSelf‐administered cognitive assessments demonstrate usability and ability to detect cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease, but usability in other neurodegenerative diseases is understudied. We investigated whether Mayo Test Drive (MTD), a self‐administered multi‐device compatible cognitive assessment platform, demonstrates usability and correlation with traditional neuropsychological tests in a pilot study of individuals with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP).MethodEleven individuals with PSP (mean age = 69.6±7.2 years; mean education = 15.3±2.7 years; 72.7% male; 90.9% white; PSP Rating Scale [PSPRS] = 32.4±15.5) enrolled in a Neurodegenerative Research Group study at Mayo Clinic participated. Participants completed neurological evaluation, traditional neuropsychological assessment, in‐person self‐administered MTD comprised of the Stricker Learning Span and Symbols Test, and a MTD usability questionnaire with quantitative and qualitative questions. Participants received diagnoses of PSP clinical variants per Movement Disorders Society‐PSP criteria. Seven participants had PSP‐Richardson, two had PSP‐postural instability, and two had PSP‐parkinsonism. We used descriptive analyses to examine usability questions, qualitative analyses for free text responses, and Spearman correlations to analyze associations between MTD and traditional tests of global cognition and five cognitive domains.ResultTen of eleven patients completed MTD (average completion time [minutes] = 22.2±6.5). Study staff terminated one participant’s session early due to an appointment conflict; we excluded this participant from analyses. Six participants completed MTD with tablets and four used smartphones. Participants reported high ease completing MTD (9.00±1.76 on 0‐10 scale) and comfortability using their devices (9.40±1.58). All participants reported they could complete MTD independently, with one participant indicating need for assistance with hyperlinks and three reporting need for assistance with QR codes. Qualitative data suggested three participants had motoric difficulty using the tablets; these individuals had the greatest PSPRS symptom severity, although MTD performance was not correlated with the PSPRS (rho = ‐.122; p>.05). MTD performance significantly correlated with the MoCA (rho = 0.88) and tests of attention, executive, and visuospatial function (Table).ConclusionIn a MTD usability pilot for participants with PSP, participants reported high ease and comfort completing MTD independently; those with greater motor symptoms had more difficulty navigating technology. Additionally, performances on MTD were correlated with the MoCA and other in‐person assessments, demonstrating convergent validity.

AbstractBackgroundFew normative data for computerized measures administered in unsupervised remote environments are available. We aimed to determine what variables to include in normative models for remote self‐administered assessments, develop normative data for measures administered through Mayo Test Drive (MTD, a multi‐device remote cognitive assessment platform) and evaluate application of norms.Method1240 adults ages 33‐100 (96% White) from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and Mayo Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center met normative sample inclusion criteria that included a concordant Cognitively Unimpaired (CU) diagnosis (3 independent raters all diagnosed CU) and CDR = 0 (see Table 1 for sample characteristics). Raw test scores were converted to normalized scaled scores. We derived regression‐based normative data that adjusted for age, age2, sex and education (base model); alternative models are also provided (age+age2+sex; age+ age2). We evaluated whether additional model terms beyond the base model were needed using an a priori cut‐off of 1% variance improvement in adjusted R2 over and above the base model. We examined rates of low test performance defined as performance below ‐1 SD in independent validation samples (n = 167 concordant CU, n = 64 mild cognitive impairment (MCI), n = 14 dementia). Rates are considered significantly different than expected when 95% confidence intervals (CIs) do not include the expected 14.7% base rate frequency.ResultNo additional potential model terms met our a priori cut‐off for inclusion beyond the base model (see Table 2), including other quadratic and cubic terms or interactions, device type, response input type, potential session interference, and national area deprivation index (ADI available in subset; N = 776). Application of norms showed expected rates of low test performance among CU participants (95% CI includes expected base rate) and significantly greater than expected rates of low test performance for all variables in MCI (e.g., 62.5% for composite) and dementia (e.g., 71.4% for composite; see Table 3).ConclusionTypical normative models appear appropriate for remote self‐administered measures and are sensitive to cognitive impairment. Device type and response input did not explain enough variance to warrant inclusion in normative models but are important for individual level interpretation. Future work will improve representation of individuals from under‐represented groups.

AbstractBackgroundSelf‐administered cognitive assessments demonstrate usability and ability to detect cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease, but usability in other neurodegenerative diseases is understudied. We investigated whether Mayo Test Drive (MTD), a self‐administered multi‐device compatible cognitive assessment platform, demonstrates usability and correlation with traditional neuropsychological tests in a pilot study of individuals with progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP).MethodEleven individuals with PSP (mean age = 69.6±7.2 years; mean education = 15.3±2.7 years; 72.7% male; 90.9% white; PSP Rating Scale [PSPRS] = 32.4±15.5) enrolled in a Neurodegenerative Research Group study at Mayo Clinic participated. Participants completed neurological evaluation, traditional neuropsychological assessment, in‐person self‐administered MTD comprised of the Stricker Learning Span and Symbols Test, and a MTD usability questionnaire with quantitative and qualitative questions. Participants received diagnoses of PSP clinical variants per Movement Disorders Society‐PSP criteria. Seven participants had PSP‐Richardson, two had PSP‐postural instability, and two had PSP‐parkinsonism. We used descriptive analyses to examine usability questions, qualitative analyses for free text responses, and Spearman correlations to analyze associations between MTD and traditional tests of global cognition and five cognitive domains.ResultTen of eleven patients completed MTD (average completion time [minutes] = 22.2±6.5). Study staff terminated one participant’s session early due to an appointment conflict; we excluded this participant from analyses. Six participants completed MTD with tablets and four used smartphones. Participants reported high ease completing MTD (9.00±1.76 on 0‐10 scale) and comfortability using their devices (9.40±1.58). All participants reported they could complete MTD independently, with one participant indicating need for assistance with hyperlinks and three reporting need for assistance with QR codes. Qualitative data suggested three participants had motoric difficulty using the tablets; these individuals had the greatest PSPRS symptom severity, although MTD performance was not correlated with the PSPRS (rho = ‐.122; p>.05). MTD performance significantly correlated with the MoCA (rho = 0.88) and tests of attention, executive, and visuospatial function (Table).ConclusionIn a MTD usability pilot for participants with PSP, participants reported high ease and comfort completing MTD independently; those with greater motor symptoms had more difficulty navigating technology. Additionally, performances on MTD were correlated with the MoCA and other in‐person assessments, demonstrating convergent validity.

AbstractBackgroundFew normative data for computerized measures administered in unsupervised remote environments are available. We aimed to determine what variables to include in normative models for remote self‐administered assessments, develop normative data for measures administered through Mayo Test Drive (MTD, a multi‐device remote cognitive assessment platform) and evaluate application of norms.Method1240 adults ages 33‐100 (96% White) from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and Mayo Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center met normative sample inclusion criteria that included a concordant Cognitively Unimpaired (CU) diagnosis (3 independent raters all diagnosed CU) and CDR = 0 (see Table 1 for sample characteristics). Raw test scores were converted to normalized scaled scores. We derived regression‐based normative data that adjusted for age, age2, sex and education (base model); alternative models are also provided (age+age2+sex; age+ age2). We evaluated whether additional model terms beyond the base model were needed using an a priori cut‐off of 1% variance improvement in adjusted R2 over and above the base model. We examined rates of low test performance defined as performance below ‐1 SD in independent validation samples (n = 167 concordant CU, n = 64 mild cognitive impairment (MCI), n = 14 dementia). Rates are considered significantly different than expected when 95% confidence intervals (CIs) do not include the expected 14.7% base rate frequency.ResultNo additional potential model terms met our a priori cut‐off for inclusion beyond the base model (see Table 2), including other quadratic and cubic terms or interactions, device type, response input type, potential session interference, and national area deprivation index (ADI available in subset; N = 776). Application of norms showed expected rates of low test performance among CU participants (95% CI includes expected base rate) and significantly greater than expected rates of low test performance for all variables in MCI (e.g., 62.5% for composite) and dementia (e.g., 71.4% for composite; see Table 3).ConclusionTypical normative models appear appropriate for remote self‐administered measures and are sensitive to cognitive impairment. Device type and response input did not explain enough variance to warrant inclusion in normative models but are important for individual level interpretation. Future work will improve representation of individuals from under‐represented groups.