Monsell, Sarah E.

Introduction: In 2015, the US Alzheimer’s Disease Centers (ADC) implemented Version 3 of the Uniform Data Set (UDS). This paper describes the history of Version 3 development and the UDS data that are freely available to researchers. Methods: UDS Version 3 was developed after years of coordination between the National Institute on Aging-appointed Clinical Task Force (CTF), clinicians from ∼30 ADCs, and the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC). The CTF recognized the need for updates to align with the state of the science in dementia research, while being flexible to the diverse needs and diseases studied at the ADCs. Version 3 also developed a nonproprietary neuropsychological battery. Results: This paper focuses on the substantial Version 3 changes to the UDS forms related to clinical diagnosis and characterization of clinical symptoms to match updated consensus-based diagnostic criteria. Between March 2015 and March 2018, 4820 participants were enrolled using UDS Version 3. Longitudinal data were available for 25,337 of the 37,568 total participants using all UDS versions. Discussion: The results from utilization of the UDS highlight the possibility for numerous research institutions to successfully collaborate, produce, and use standardized data collection instruments for over a decade.

Studies have demonstrated associations between cardiovascular factors and Alzheimer disease (AD) with minimal focus on other neurodegenerative diseases. Utilizing cross-sectional data from 17,532 individuals in the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center, Uniform Data Set, we compared the presence of cardiovascular factors [body mass index (BMI), atrial fibrillation, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes] in individuals carrying a diagnosis of Probable AD (ProbAD), Possible AD, vascular dementia, dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), frontotemporal dementia, Parkinson disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, or corticobasal degeneration, with that of normals. Generalized linear mixed models were fitted with age at visit, gender, and cardiovascular factors as fixed effects and Alzheimer’s Disease Centers as random effects. In late life, only BMI of ProbAD and DLB patients was statistically significantly lower than that in normals (P–values <0.001). When accounting for colinearity within cardiovascular factors, a low BMI was a comorbidity of certain dementia etiologies as compared with normals. These data support a concept of disease-specific associations with certain cardiovascular factors.