Objectives: Brain volume reduction occurs with age, especially in Parkinson plus syndrome or psychiatric disorders. We searched to define the degree of volume discrepancy in advanced IPD patients and correlate the anatomical volumetric changes to motor symptoms and cognitive function.
Methods: We determined the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based volumetry of deep brain nuclei and brain structures of DBS-IPD group and matched controls.
Results: DBS-IPD group had significant deep nuclei atrophy and volume discrepancy, yet none had cognitive or psychobehavioural disturbances. Globus pallidus volume showed positive correlation to higher mental function.
Conclusion: The morphometric changes and clinical severity discrepancy in IPD may imply a more complex degenerative mechanism involving multiple neural pathways. Such alteration could be early changes before clinical manifestation.
METHODS: In this study, the effect of xanthone-enriched fraction of Garcinia mangostana (XEFGM) and α-mangostin (α-MG) were investigated on cognitive functions of the chronic cerebral hypoperfusion (CCH) rats.
KEY FINDINGS: HPLC analysis revealed that XEFGM contained 55.84% of α-MG. Acute oral administration of XEFGM (25, 50 and 100 mg/kg) and α-MG (25 and 50 mg/kg) before locomotor activity and Morris water maze (MWM) tests showed no significant difference between the groups for locomotor activity.
CONCLUSIONS: However, α-MG (50 mg/kg) and XEFGM (100 mg/kg) reversed the cognitive impairment induced by CCH in MWM test. α-MG (50 mg/kg) was further tested upon sub-acute 14-day treatment in CCH rats. Cognitive improvement was shown in MWM test but not in long-term potentiation (LTP). BDNF but not CaMKII was found to be down-regulated in CCH rats; however, both parameters were not affected by α-MG. In conclusion, α-MG ameliorated learning and memory deficits in both acute and sub-acute treatments in CCH rats by improving the spatial learning but not hippocampal LTP. Hence, α-MG may be a promising lead compound for CCH-associated neurodegenerative diseases, including vascular dementia and Alzheimer's disease.
METHODS: This phase 3, open-label, multicenter, long-term (up to 1 year) study was conducted between October 2015 and October 2017. Patients (≥ 18 years) with TRD (DSM-5 diagnosis of major depressive disorder and nonresponse to ≥ 2 OAD treatments) were enrolled directly or transferred from a short-term study (patients aged ≥ 65 years). Esketamine nasal spray (28-mg, 56-mg, or 84-mg) plus new OAD was administered twice a week in a 4-week induction (IND) phase and weekly or every-other-week for patients who were responders and entered a 48-week optimization/maintenance (OP/MAINT) phase.
RESULTS: Of 802 enrolled patients, 86.2% were direct-entry and 13.8% were transferred-entry; 580 (74.5%) of 779 patients who entered the IND phase completed the phase, and 150 (24.9%) of 603 who entered the OP/MAINT phase completed the phase. Common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were dizziness (32.9%), dissociation (27.6%), nausea (25.1%), and headache (24.9%). Seventy-six patients (9.5%) discontinued esketamine due to TEAEs. Fifty-five patients (6.9%) experienced serious TEAEs. Most TEAEs occurred on dosing days, were mild or moderate in severity, and resolved on the same day. Two deaths were reported; neither was considered related to esketamine. Cognitive performance generally either improved or remained stable postbaseline. There was no case of interstitial cystitis or respiratory depression. Treatment-emergent dissociative symptoms were transient and generally resolved within 1.5 hours postdose. Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score decreased during the IND phase, and this reduction persisted during the OP/MAINT phase (mean [SD] change from baseline of respective phase to endpoint: IND, -16.4 [8.76]; OP/MAINT, 0.3 [8.12]).
CONCLUSIONS: Long-term esketamine nasal spray plus new OAD therapy had a manageable safety profile, and improvements in depression appeared to be sustained in patients with TRD.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02497287.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of animal-assisted therapy for people with dementia.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS: the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register on 5 September 2019. ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified from monthly searches of major healthcare databases, trial registries, and grey literature sources. We also searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), ISI Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO's trial registry portal.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-randomised trials, and randomised cross-over trials that compared AAT versus no AAT, AAT using live animals versus alternatives such as robots or toys, or AAT versus any other active intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using the standard methods of Cochrane Dementia. Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and risk of bias of the retrieved records. We expressed our results using mean difference (MD), standardised mean difference (SMD), and risk ratio (RR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) where appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS: We included nine RCTs from 10 reports. All nine studies were conducted in Europe and the US. Six studies were parallel-group, individually randomised RCTs; one was a randomised cross-over trial; and two were cluster-RCTs that were possibly related where randomisation took place at the level of the day care and nursing home. We identified two ongoing trials from trial registries. There were three comparisons: AAT versus no AAT (standard care or various non-animal-related activities), AAT using live animals versus robotic animals, and AAT using live animals versus the use of a soft animal toy. The studies evaluated 305 participants with dementia. One study used horses and the remainder used dogs as the therapy animal. The duration of the intervention ranged from six weeks to six months, and the therapy sessions lasted between 10 and 90 minutes each, with a frequency ranging from one session every two weeks to two sessions per week. There was a wide variety of instruments used to measure the outcomes. All studies were at high risk of performance bias and unclear risk of selection bias. Our certainty about the results for all major outcomes was very low to moderate. Comparing AAT versus no AAT, participants who received AAT may be slightly less depressed after the intervention (MD -2.87, 95% CI -5.24 to -0.50; 2 studies, 83 participants; low-certainty evidence), but they did not appear to have improved quality of life (MD 0.45, 95% CI -1.28 to 2.18; 3 studies, 164 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no clear differences in all other major outcomes, including social functioning (MD -0.40, 95% CI -3.41 to 2.61; 1 study, 58 participants; low-certainty evidence), problematic behaviour (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.98 to 0.30; 3 studies, 142 participants; very-low-certainty evidence), agitation (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.89 to 0.10; 3 studies, 143 participants; very-low-certainty evidence), activities of daily living (MD 4.65, 95% CI -16.05 to 25.35; 1 study, 37 participants; low-certainty evidence), and self-care ability (MD 2.20, 95% CI -1.23 to 5.63; 1 study, 58 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data on adverse events. Comparing AAT using live animals versus robotic animals, one study (68 participants) found mixed effects on social function, with longer duration of physical contact but shorter duration of talking in participants who received AAT using live animals versus robotic animals (median: 93 seconds with live versus 28 seconds with robotic for physical contact; 164 seconds with live versus 206 seconds with robotic for talk directed at a person; 263 seconds with live versus 307 seconds with robotic for talk in total). Another study showed no clear differences between groups in behaviour measured using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (MD -6.96, 95% CI -14.58 to 0.66; 78 participants; low-certainty evidence) or quality of life (MD -2.42, 95% CI -5.71 to 0.87; 78 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data on the other outcomes. Comparing AAT using live animals versus a soft toy cat, one study (64 participants) evaluated only social functioning, in the form of duration of contact and talking. The data were expressed as median and interquartile ranges. Duration of contact was slightly longer in participants in the AAT group and duration of talking slightly longer in those exposed to the toy cat. This was low-certainty evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found low-certainty evidence that AAT may slightly reduce depressive symptoms in people with dementia. We found no clear evidence that AAT affects other outcomes in this population, with our certainty in the evidence ranging from very-low to moderate depending on the outcome. We found no evidence on safety or effects on the animals. Therefore, clear conclusions cannot yet be drawn about the overall benefits and risks of AAT in people with dementia. Further well-conducted RCTs are needed to improve the certainty of the evidence. In view of the difficulty in achieving blinding of participants and personnel in such trials, future RCTs should work on blinding outcome assessors, document allocation methods clearly, and include major patient-important outcomes such as affect, emotional and social functioning, quality of life, adverse events, and outcomes for animals.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of carbohydrates in improving cognitive function in older adults.
SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialized Register on 22 June 2010 using the terms: carbohydrates OR carbohydrate OR monosaccharides OR disaccharides OR oligosaccharides OR polysaccharides OR CARBS. ALOIS contains records from all major healthcare databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many trial databases and grey literature sources.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCT) that have examined the efficacy of any form of carbohydrates in normal cognition and MCI.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One review author selected and retrieved relevant articles for further assessment. The remaining authors independently assessed whether any of the retrieved trials should be included. Disagreements were resolved by discussion.
MAIN RESULTS: There is no suitable RCT of any form of carbohydrates involving independent-living older adults with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no suitable RCTs on which to base any recommendations about the use of any form of carbohydrate for enhancing cognitive performance in older adults with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment. More studies of many different carbohydrates are needed to tease out complex nutritional issues and further evaluate memory improvement.
METHODS: A total of 301 older adults (⩾60 years of age) participating in a study on aging had their hearing tested using pure-tone audiometry. Self-perceived hearing loss was assessed using a single question. Sociodemographic profile, otologic history, and general cognitive status were also obtained.
RESULTS: A single question had low sensitivity in detecting actual hearing loss: 31.3% for 4-frequency average > 25 dBHL and 48.8% for 4-frequency average > 40 dBHL. Besides hearing level, history of otorrhea and tinnitus were factors that were associated with self-perceived hearing loss among older adults with at least mild hearing loss. Hearing-help-seeking behavior was not associated with any of the tested variables. The hearing aid adoption rate was 2.7% and 7.3% among participants with 4-frequency averages > 25 dBHL and > 40 dBHL, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The underestimation of hearing loss in the majority of older adults in this study poses a potential barrier to hearing loss intervention.