Goldman, Jennifer G

Abstract Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), a progressive neurodegenerative disease with heterogeneous clinical presentations, greatly impacts patients, caregivers, and society. Despite its frequency, diagnosing and treating DLB remains challenging. Advances in in vivo biomarker assays reflecting underlying pathology are improving disease identification, diagnostic accuracy, and therapeutic development for biologically targeted, disease‐modifying agents. Consequently, definitions of Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease (PD) have shifted to focus on pathological changes occurring before clinical features, with proposed frameworks for detecting pathological amyloid and tau, neurodegeneration, and other markers (National Institute on Aging‐Alzheimer's Association) and alpha‐synucleinopathy and dopaminergic degeneration (Neuronal α‐synuclein Disease Integrated Staging System, SynNeurGe). The biological frameworks, particularly those related to alpha‐synuclein (α‐synuclein), have sparked debate about unifying DLB and PD under a single pathobiologic disease. This paper discusses the implications of these biological frameworks for the DLB community, addressing topics regarding multiple pathologies and neurochemical systems, clinical heterogeneity, and functional impairment, and exploring the potential impact on clinical trials and care. Highlights DLB is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with varied clinical presentations. Diagnosing and treating DLB remains challenging despite its frequency. Biological frameworks are reshaping Alzheimer's and Parkinson's definitions. In vivo biomarkers are improving DLB identification and diagnostic accuracy. Debate exists regarding unifying DLB and Parkinson's under one pathobiology.

Introduction: Lewy body dementia (LBD) is common, yet under-recognized and under-researched. To plan studies with the highest impact, engagement of the community personally affected by these conditions is essential. Methods: A web-based survey of people living with LBD and current and former caregivers of people with LBD queried research priorities through forced ranking and exploration of burden of LBD symptoms. Specific caregiving needs in LBD and perceptions of research participation were also investigated. Results: Between April 7, 2021 and July 1, 2021, 984 responses were recorded. Top research priorities included disease-modifying therapies and improved disease detection and staging. People with LBD were interested in pathophysiology and more bothered by motor symptoms; caregivers were interested in risk factors and symptomatic therapies and more bothered by neuropsychiatric symptoms. Few available LBD treatments and resources were rated as helpful, and many valuable services were never received. Previous participation in LBD research was infrequent, but interest was high. Discussion: People with LBD and caregivers highlighted the need for research across all aspects of LBD, from pathophysiology and disease modification to prognosis, education, symptomatic treatments, and caregiver support. Funders should increase support for all aspects of LBD research to target the many needs identified by individuals and families living with LBD.

Abstract The regulatory path for drug approval is increasingly well defined. Drugs for the treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD) need to show statistically significant benefit over placebo with respect to cognitive and functional measures, with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale and Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive Subscale being among the most often used instruments in AD clinical trials. In contrast, there are no validated instruments for use in clinical trials of drugs for the treatment of dementia with Lewy bodies. This poses challenges for drug development because the regulatory pathway to drug approval requires demonstrable efficacy measures. In December 2021, the Lewy Body Dementia Association advisory group met with representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration to discuss the lack of approved drugs and treatments, discernment of efficacy measures, and identification of biomarkers. Highlights The Lewy Body with Dementia Association convened a listening session with the US Food and Drug Administration on dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and clinical trial design. Gaps include DLB‐specific measures, alpha synuclein biomarkers, and coexisting pathologies. DLB clinical trial design should focus on clinical value and disease specificity.

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe criteria for PD‐MCI allow the use of global cognitive tests. Their predictive value for conversion from PD‐MCI to PDD, especially compared to comprehensive neuropsychological assessment, is unknown.MethodsThe MDS PD‐MCI Study Group combined four datasets containing global cognitive tests as well as a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment to define PD‐MCI (n = 467). Risk for developing PDD was examined using a Cox model. Global cognitive tests were compared to neuropsychological test batteries (Level I&II) in determining risk for PDD.ResultsPD‐MCI based on a global cognitive test (MMSE or MoCA) increases the hazard for developing PDD (respectively HR = 2.57, P = 0.001; HR = 4.14, P = <0.001). The C‐statistics for MMSE (0.72) and MoCA (0.70) were lower than those based on neuropsychological tests (Level I = 0.82; Level II = 0.81). Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy balance was best in Level II.ConclusionMMSE and MoCA predict conversion to PDD. However, Level II neuropsychological assessment seems the preferred assessment for PD‐MCI.

AbstractBackgroundThe International Parkinson and Movement Disorders Society criteria for mild cognitive impairment in PD need validation. The objectives of this present study were to evaluate prognostic validity of level I (abbreviated) International Parkinson and Movement Disorders Society mild cognitive impairment in PD criteria for development of PD dementia and compared them with level II (comprehensive) criteria.MethodsWe analyzed data from 8 international studies (1045 patients) from our consortium that included baseline data on demographics, motor signs, depression, detailed neuropsychological testing, and longitudinal follow‐up for conversion to Parkinson's disease dementia. Survival analysis evaluated their contribution to the hazard of Parkinson's disease dementia.ResultsLevel I mild cognitive impairment in PD, increasing age, male sex, and severity of PD motor signs independently increased the hazard of Parkinson's disease dementia. Level I and level II mild cognitive impairment in PD classification had similar discriminative ability with respect to the time to Parkinson's disease dementia.ConclusionsLevel I mild cognitive impairment in PD classification independently contributes to the hazard of Parkinson's disease dementia. This finding supports the prognostic validity of the abbreviated mild cognitive impairment in PD criteria. © 2019 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

AbstractBackground: Numerous neuropsychological tests and test versions are used in Parkinson's disease research, but their relative capacity to detect mild cognitive deficits and their comparability across studies are unknown. The objective of this study was to identify neuropsychological tests that consistently detect cognitive decline in PD across studies.Methods: Data from 30 normed neuropsychological tests across 20 international studies in up to 2908 nondemented PD patients were analyzed. A subset of 17 tests was administered to up to 1247 healthy controls. A 2‐step meta‐analytic approach using standardized scores compared performance in PD with normative data.Results: Pooled estimates of the differences between PD and site‐specific healthy controls identified significant cognitive deficits in PD patients on 14 test scores across 5 commonly assessed cognitive domains (attention or working memory, executive, language, memory, and visuospatial abilities), but healthy control performance was statistically above average on 7 of these tests. Analyses based on published norms only, as opposed to direct assessment of healthy controls, showed high between‐study variability that could not be accounted for and led to inconclusive results.Conclusions: Normed neuropsychological tests across multiple cognitive domains consistently detect cognitive deficits in PD when compared with site‐specific healthy control performance, but relative PD performance was significantly affected by the inclusion and type of healthy controls versus the use of published norms only. Additional research is needed to identify a cognitive battery that can be administered in multisite international studies and that is sensitive to cognitive decline, responsive to therapeutic interventions, and superior to individual cognitive tests. © 2018 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

ABSTRACT Background The International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society criteria for mild cognitive impairment in PD were recently formulated. Objectives The aim of this international study was to evaluate the predictive validity of the comprehensive (level II) version of these criteria by assessment of their contribution to the hazard of PD dementia. Methods Individual patient data were selected from four separate studies on cognition in PD that provided information on demographics, motor examination, depression, neuropsychological examination suitable for application of level II criteria, and longitudinal follow‐up for conversion to dementia. Survival analysis evaluated the predictive value of level II criteria for cognitive decline toward dementia as expressed by the relative hazard of dementia. Results A total of 467 patients were included. The analyses showed a clear contribution of impairment according to level II mild cognitive impairment criteria, age, and severity of PD motor symptoms to the hazard of dementia. There was a trend of increasing hazard of dementia with declining neuropsychological performance. Conclusions This is the first large international study evaluating the predictive validity of level II mild cognitive impairment criteria for PD. The results showed a clear and unique contribution of classification according to level II criteria to the hazard of PD dementia. This finding supports their predictive validity and shows that they contribute important new information on the hazard of dementia, beyond known demographic and PD‐specific factors of influence. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

ABSTRACT As members of the Lewy Body Dementia Association Scientific Advisory Council, we aim to address some of the issues raised in the article titled “Time to Redefine PD? Introductory Statement of the MDS Task Force on the Definition of Parkinson's Disease.” In particular, we suggest that the 1‐year rule distinguishing Parkinson's disease dementia from dementia with Lewy bodies is worth maintaining because it serves an important purpose in clinical practice and clinical and basic science research and when helping the lay community understand the complexity of these different clinical phenotypes. Furthermore, we believe that adding an additional diagnostic label, “PD (dementia with Lewy bodies subtype),” will confuse rather than clarify the distinction between dementia with Lewy bodies and PD or PD dementia, and will not improve management or expedite therapeutic development. We present arguments supporting our contentions. © 2016 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.