Schenck, Carlos H.

AbstractAlpha-synucleinopathies can be identified in their prodromal phase, raising several ethical issues. In this review, we first provide definitions of prodromal α-synucleinopathies and discuss the importance of distinguishing between prodromes and risk factors. Next, we discuss the implications of a diagnosis of prodromal α-synucleinopathy and considerations regarding prognostic counseling in both clinical and research settings. We review available data on patient preferences regarding disclosure as well as providers' perspectives. We examine the pros and cons of disclosing a diagnosis of prodromal α-synucleinopathy, taking into consideration the differences between clinical and research settings. Asking about willingness to know in clinical and research settings and the shared decision-making process applied to prognostic counseling is discussed. Concerning research settings, ethical aspects regarding clinical trials are addressed. Availability of direct-to-consumer technologies will likely lead to novel contexts requiring prognostic counseling, and future neuroprotective or neuromodulating treatments may require further considerations on the timing, role, and importance of prognostic counseling. Recommendations on how to address ethical gaps should be a priority for patients, medical professional societies, and research workgroups. Ethical issues must be considered as an integral part of the overall clinical and research approach to prodromal synucleinopathies.

AbstractBackgroundIt is important to determine the natural history of individuals with RBD and generate clinical and neuropsychological data for planning disease‐modifying trials to delay or prevent phenoconversion of RBD to an overt synucleinopathy such as dementia with Lewy bodies, Parkinson’s disease, or multiple system atrophy. Our objective is to present initial neuropsychological data on 136 participants with REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) without an overt synucleinopathy who are in the North American Prodromal Synucleinopathy (NAPS; R34AG056639) Consortium.MethodAs part of the NAPS protocol (www.naps‐rbd.org), investigators at 10 centers in North America are enrolling a target of 360 participants with RBD. A comprehensive clinical battery and a set of neuropsychological measures (using the National Alzheimer Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set version 3 or UDS3) are performed at each visit.ResultParticipants were 82% male, ranging in age from 35‐85 (Mean=65.9, SD=15.9) and education from 8‐20 years (Mean=15.9, SD=3.1). Only 17 participants (13%) were impairment‐free across all tests administered. The proportions of participants with impaired scores were tabulated as follows (< ‐1.5 SD after adjustment for age, sex, and education): global cognition – 17%; attention/executive functioning – 10‐20% across measures; language – 14‐24% across measures; visuospatial – 16%; and episodic learning/memory – 18‐25% across measures. Of all participants, 79 (58%) showed impairments < ‐2 SD. Moreover, 53% of those with cognitive impairment involved impact in 2 domains, an additional 20% in 3 domains, and another 4% was impaired in all domains. The combination of attention/executive and language was most often observed.ConclusionCollection of a comprehensive set of clinical and neuropsychological measures is feasible and tolerated in RBD patients. Using the UDS3 neuropsychological test battery, impairment in one or more measures was present in 87% of participants, and 58% showed impairments greater than 2 SD below the mean in the absence of a clinical diagnosis of dementia. Impairments in > 2 domains was common, most frequently involving attention/executive and language. Future longitudinal assessments will be required to determine the predictive utility of neuropsychological performance for phenoconversion of RBD to an overt synucleinopathy.