17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Racial and Ethnic Differences in Amyloid PET Positivity in Individuals With Mild Cognitive Impairment or Dementia : A Secondary Analysis of the Imaging Dementia–Evidence for Amyloid Scanning (IDEAS) Cohort Study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          Do amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) positivity rates differ across racial and ethnic groups with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia?

          Findings

          In this cohort study of 17 107 Medicare beneficiaries with MCI or dementia, the proportion of amyloid positive PET scans was greater among White participants compared with Black and Asian participants. When racial and ethnic groups were matched by social and demographic factors, the proportion of amyloid positive PET scans was greater among White participants compared with Hispanic and Asian participants but not compared with Black participants.

          Meaning

          The results of this study showed differences in rates of amyloid PET positivity among racial and ethnic groups; these findings may reflect differences in underlying etiology of cognitive impairment between groups.

          Abstract

          This cohort study evaluates differences by race and ethnicity in participants with mild cognitive impairment or dementia.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Racial and ethnic groups with higher rates of clinical Alzheimer disease (AD) are underrepresented in studies of AD biomarkers, including amyloid positron emission tomography (PET).

          Objective

          To compare amyloid PET positivity among a diverse cohort of individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          Secondary analysis of the Imaging Dementia–Evidence for Amyloid Scanning (IDEAS), a single-arm multisite cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries who met appropriate-use criteria for amyloid PET imaging between February 2016 and September 2017 with follow-up through January 2018. Data were analyzed between April 2020 and January 2022. This study used 2 approaches: the McNemar test to compare amyloid PET positivity proportions between matched racial and ethnic groups and multivariable logistic regression to assess the odds of having a positive amyloid PET scan. IDEAS enrolled participants at 595 US dementia specialist practices. A total of 21 949 were enrolled and 4842 (22%) were excluded from the present analysis due to protocol violations, not receiving an amyloid PET scan, not having a positive or negative scan, or because of small numbers in some subgroups.

          Exposures

          In the IDEAS study, participants underwent a single amyloid PET scan.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          The main outcomes were amyloid PET positivity proportions and odds.

          Results

          Data from 17 107 individuals (321 Asian, 635 Black, 829 Hispanic, and 15 322 White) with MCI or dementia and amyloid PET were analyzed between April 2020 and January 2022. The median (range) age of participants was 75 (65-105) years; 8769 participants (51.3%) were female and 8338 (48.7%) were male. In the optimal 1:1 matching analysis (n = 3154), White participants had a greater proportion of positive amyloid PET scans compared with Asian participants (181 of 313; 57.8%; 95% CI, 52.3-63.2 vs 142 of 313; 45.4%; 95% CI, 39.9-50.9, respectively; P = .001) and Hispanic participants (482 of 780; 61.8%; 95% CI, 58.3-65.1 vs 425 of 780; 54.5%; 95% CI, 51.0-58.0, respectively; P = .003) but not Black participants (359 of 615; 58.4%; 95% CI, 54.4-62.2 vs 333 of 615; 54.1%; 95% CI, 50.2-58.0, respectively; P = .13). In the adjusted model, the odds of having a positive amyloid PET scan were lower for Asian participants (odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37-0.59; P < .001), Black participants (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.84; P < .001), and Hispanic participants (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.59-0.79; P < .001) compared with White participants.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          Racial and ethnic differences found in amyloid PET positivity among individuals with MCI and dementia in this study may indicate differences in underlying etiology of cognitive impairment and guide future treatment and prevention approaches.

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Structural racism and health inequities in the USA: evidence and interventions

          The Lancet, 389(10077), 1453-1463
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association guidelines for the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer's disease.

            A consensus panel from the United States and Europe was convened recently to update and revise the 1997 consensus guidelines for the neuropathologic evaluation of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other diseases of brain that are common in the elderly. The new guidelines recognize the pre-clinical stage of AD, enhance the assessment of AD to include amyloid accumulation as well as neurofibrillary change and neuritic plaques, establish protocols for the neuropathologic assessment of Lewy body disease, vascular brain injury, hippocampal sclerosis, and TDP-43 inclusions, and recommend standard approaches for the workup of cases and their clinico-pathologic correlation. Copyright © 2012 The Alzheimer's Association. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Interval Estimation for a Binomial Proportion

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Neurol
                JAMA Neurol
                JAMA Neurology
                American Medical Association
                2168-6149
                2168-6157
                3 October 2022
                November 2022
                3 October 2022
                : 79
                : 11
                : 1139-1147
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
                [2 ]Department of Neurology, Memory and Aging Center, Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco
                [3 ]Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill
                [4 ]Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island
                [5 ]Department of Epidemiology, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island
                [6 ]Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia
                [7 ]Alzheimer’s Association, Chicago, Illinois
                [8 ]Department of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond
                [9 ]Center for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
                [10 ]Edward Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri
                [11 ]Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California
                [12 ]Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis
                [13 ]Associate Editor, JAMA Neurology
                [14 ]Department of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: July 29, 2022.
                Published Online: October 3, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.3157
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2022 Wilkins CH et al. JAMA Neurology.
                Corresponding Author: Consuelo H. Wilkins, MD, MSCI, Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2525 West End, Ste 600, Nashville, TN 37203 ( consuelo.h.wilkins@ 123456vumc.org ).
                Author Contributions: Drs Wilkins and Gatsonis had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Wilkins, Dilworth-Anderson, Apgar, Carrillo, Gatsonis, Hill, Hillner, Siegel, Whitmer, Rabinovici.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Wilkins, Windon, Romanoff, Carrillo, Gareen, Gatsonis, Hanna, March, Siegel, Whitmer, Rabinovici.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Wilkins, Windon, Dilworth-Anderson, Romanoff, Hillner.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Wilkins, Windon, Dilworth-Anderson, Romanoff, Apgar, Carrillo, Gareen, Gatsonis, Hanna, Hill, March, Siegel, Whitmer, Rabinovici.
                Statistical analysis: Romanoff, Gatsonis, Hanna, Whitmer.
                Obtained funding: Dilworth-Anderson, Carrillo, Gatsonis, Whitmer, Rabinovici.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Wilkins, Apgar, Carrillo, Hillner, March.
                Supervision: Wilkins, Apgar, Carrillo, Gatsonis, Hill, Siegel.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Wilkins reported grants from the National Institutes of Health, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, American College of Radiology, and Alzheimer’s Association. Dr Windon reported grants from the Alzheimer’s Association and the National Institutes of Health. Dr Dilworth-Anderson reported funding by the American College of Radiology, the National Institutes of Health, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. Mr Romanoff, Dr Gatsonis, Ms Hanna, Dr Gareen, and Mr March reported funding from the American College of Radiology. Mr Apgar reported receiving funding from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and American College of Radiology Imaging Network (funded by the National Cancer Institute); the Medical Imaging and Data Resource Consortium (funded by National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering); and the Alzheimer’s Association, GE Healthcare, Piramal, and Eli Lilly to the American College of Radiology. Dr Hill reported grants from the National Institutes of Health and holds unpaid roles with advisory groups dedicated to diversity, equity, and inclusion at the Center for Bioethics in Research and Healthcare at Tuskegee University; University of Michigan Center for Research on Ethnicity, Culture and Health; and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation Health Policy Fellowship Program. Dr Hillner reported receiving grants and clinical trial support from the American College of Radiology and the Alzheimer’s Association. Dr Siegel reports grants from the American College of Radiology and nonfinancial support from the Alzheimer’s Association during the conduct of the study and personal fees from the American College of Radiology (self and spouse), Avid Radiopharmaceuticals, Curium Pharma, Progenics Pharmaceuticals, American Medical Foundation for Peer Review & Education, Siemens Healthineers (spouse), Capella Imaging, GE Healthcare, Huron Consulting Group, Lantheus Medical Imaging, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Cinven Capital Management, Nuclear Medicine Clinical Trial Group, Radiological Society of North America (self and spouse), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and American College of Radiology Imaging Network Medical Research Foundation (spouse), Evicore Healthcare (spouse), Gerson Lehman Group, Guidepoint Group, InTouch Group, LEK Consulting, Precision Advisors, Precision Effect, Inc, and Techspert and grants from Curium Pharma, Progenics Pharmaceuticals, ImaginAb, and Blue Earth Diagnostics outside the submitted work. Dr Carrillo is employed by the Alzheimer’s Association. Dr Rabinovici reported grants from the National Institutes of Health, American College of Radiology, Alzheimer’s Association, Rainwater Charitable Foundation, Avid Radiopharmaceuticals Inc, GE Healthcare, Life Molecular Imaging, and Genentech and personal fees from Eisai, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Genentech, and Roche and is Associate Editor of JAMA Neurology. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: The IDEAS trial was funded by the Alzheimer’s Association, the American College of Radiology, Avid Radiopharmaceuticals Inc (a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company), GE Healthcare, and Life Molecular Imaging (formerly Piramal Imaging). Dr. Wilkins received funding from the National Institute on Aging (P20AG068082), the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR002243 and U24TR001579), and the West End Home Foundation. Dr Rabinovici reported receiving funding for this work from the National Institute on Aging (R35-AG072362) and the Alzheimer’s Association (ZEN-21-848216).
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funders participated in the design and conduct of the IDEAS study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. The Alzheimer’s Association and American College of Radiology additionally participated in the decision to submit this manuscript for publication but did not have the right to veto submission or to require submission to a particular journal. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services provided coverage for amyloid positron emission tomography scans under coverage with evidence development.
                Disclaimer: Dr Rabinovici is Associate Editor of JAMA Neurology, but was not involved in any of the decisions regarding review of the manuscript or its acceptance.
                Article
                noi220059
                10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.3157
                9531087
                36190710
                99cfde22-8e9a-4e7c-a4fa-dfd110b9ca57
                Copyright 2022 Wilkins CH et al. JAMA Neurology.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 5 May 2022
                : 29 July 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: Alzheimer’s Association
                Funded by: American College of Radiology
                Funded by: Avid Radiopharmaceuticals Inc
                Funded by: GE Healthcare
                Funded by: Life Molecular Imaging
                Funded by: National Institute on Aging
                Funded by: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
                Funded by: West End Home Foundation
                Funded by: National Institute on Aging
                Funded by: Alzheimer’s Association
                Categories
                Research
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online First
                Comments

                Comments

                Comment on this article