The Comprehensive Assessment of Neurodegeneration and Dementia (COMPASS-ND) cohort study of the Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging (CCNA) is a national initiative to catalyze research on dementia, set up to support the research agendas of CCNA teams. This cross-country longitudinal cohort of 2310 deeply phenotyped subjects with various forms of dementia and mild memory loss or concerns, along with cognitively intact elderly subjects, will test hypotheses generated by these teams.

The COMPASS-ND protocol, initial grant proposal for funding, fifth semi-annual CCNA Progress Report submitted to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research December 2017, and other documents supplemented by modifications made and lessons learned after implementation were used by the authors to create the description of the study provided here.

The CCNA COMPASS-ND cohort includes participants from across Canada with various cognitive conditions associated with or at risk of neurodegenerative diseases. They will undergo a wide range of experimental, clinical, imaging, and genetic investigation to specifically address the causes, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of these conditions in the aging population. Data derived from clinical and cognitive assessments, biospecimens, brain imaging, genetics, and brain donations will be used to test hypotheses generated by CCNA research teams and other Canadian researchers. The study is the most comprehensive and ambitious Canadian study of dementia. Initial data posting occurred in 2018, with the full cohort to be accrued by 2020.

Availability of data from the COMPASS-ND study will provide a major stimulus for dementia research in Canada in the coming years.

Mild behavioral impairment (MBI) describes later life acquired, sustained neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in cognitively normal individuals or those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), as an at-risk state for incident cognitive decline and dementia. We developed an operational definition of MBI and tested whether the presence of MBI was related to caregiver burden in patients with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) or MCI assessed at a memory clinic.

MBI was assessed in 282 consecutive memory clinic patients with SCD (n = 119) or MCI (n = 163) in accordance with the International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment – Alzheimer's Association (ISTAART–AA) research diagnostic criteria. We operationalized a definition of MBI using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q). Caregiver burden was assessed using the Zarit caregiver burden scale. Generalized linear regression was used to model the effect of MBI domains on caregiver burden.

While MBI was more prevalent in MCI (85.3%) than in SCD (76.5%), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.06). Prevalence estimates across MBI domains were affective dysregulation (77.8%); impulse control (64.4%); decreased motivation (51.7%); social inappropriateness (27.8%); and abnormal perception or thought content (8.7%). Affective dysregulation (p = 0.03) and decreased motivation (p=0.01) were more prevalent in MCI than SCD patients. Caregiver burden was 3.35 times higher when MBI was present after controlling for age, education, sex, and MCI (p < 0.0001).

MBI was common in memory clinic patients without dementia and was associated with greater caregiver burden. These data show that MBI is a common and clinically relevant syndrome.

We examined whether easily attainable variables were useful in predicting who became demented over a five year period and determined the rates of incident dementia for different categories of mild cognitive impairment.

This was a cohort study of subjects recruited nationally in a population-based survey of Canadians 65 years and older (the Canadian Study of Health and Aging). After standardized clinical assessments, a subset of subjects (n=1782) was categorized as not demented at time one. Identical study methods allowed a reassessment of the cognitive status of surviving subjects (n=892) five years later.

Three baseline variables (Modified Mini Mental State (3MS) score, subject's age, and an informant's report of the presence of memory problems) were statistically significant predictors of the development of a dementia. An equation incorporating these three variables had a sensitivity of 79% and a specificity of 56% for predicting dementia among survivors at time two. An equation substituting the MMSE for the 3MS showed similar results. The various categories of mild cognitive impairment examined showed significantly different likelihoods for the subsequent development of a dementia. Some categories with a higher dementia risk were characterized by inclusion criteria requiring neuropsychological test scores that were greater than one standard deviation (SD) below the mean of age based normative data.

In the absence of extensive laboratory, radiologic or neuropsychological tests, simple variables that can be easily determined in the course of a single clinical encounter were useful in predicting subjects with a higher risk of developing dementia. Attempts to use neuropsychological results to predict the development of dementia should look for significant impairments on age-standardized tests.

Population-based prevalence and incidence studies are essential for understanding the burden of frontotemporal dementia (FTD).

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify population-based publications from 1985 to 2012, addressing the incidence and/or prevalence of FTD. References of included articles and prior systematic reviews were searched for additional studies. Two reviewers screened all abstracts and full-text reviews, abstracted data and performed quality assessments.

Twenty-six studies were included. Methodological limitations led to wide ranges in the estimates for prevalence (point prevalence 0.01-4.6 per 1000 persons; period prevalence 0.16-31.04 per 1000 persons) and incidence (0.0-0.3 per 1000 person-years). FTD accounted for an average of 2.7% (range 0-9.1%) of all dementia cases among prevalence studies that included subjects 65 and older compared to 10.2% (range 2.8-15.7%) in studies restricted to those aged less than 65. The cumulative numbers of male (373 [52.5%]) and female (338 [47.5%]) cases from studies reporting this information were nearly equal (p=0.18). The behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD) was almost four times as common as the primary progressive aphasias.

Population-based estimates for the epidemiology of FTD varied widely in the included studies. Refinements in the diagnostic process, possibly by the use of validated biomarkers or limiting case ascertainment to specialty services, are needed to obtain more precise estimates of the prevalence and incidence of FTD.

Population-based prevalence and incidence studies are essential for understanding the societal burden of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB).

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify publications addressing the incidence and/or prevalence of DLB. References of included articles and prior systematic reviews were searched for additional studies. Two reviewers screened all abstracts and full-text reviews, abstracted data and performed quality assessments.

Twenty-two studies were included. Incidence rates ranged from 0.5 to 1.6 per 1000 person-years. DLB accounted for 3.2-7.1% of all dementia cases in the incidence studies. Point and period prevalence estimates ranged from 0.02 to 63.5 per 1000 persons. Increasing prevalence estimates were reported with increasing age. DLB accounted for from 0.3 to 24.4% of all cases of dementia in the prevalence studies.

DLB becomes more common with increasing age and accounts for about 5% of all dementia cases in older populations.

Updated information on the epidemiology of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is needed to ensure that adequate resources are available to meet current and future healthcare needs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence and prevalence of AD.

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 1985 to 2012, as well as the reference lists of selected articles. Included articles had to provide an original population-based estimate for the incidence and/or prevalence of AD. Two individuals independently performed abstract and full-text reviews, data extraction and quality assessments. Random-effects models were employed to generate pooled estimates stratified by age, sex, diagnostic criteria, location (i.e., continent) and time (i.e., when the study was done).

Of 16,066 abstracts screened, 707 articles were selected for full-text review. A total of 119 studies met the inclusion criteria. In community settings, the overall point prevalence of dementia due to AD among individuals 60+ was 40.2 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 29.1-55.6), and pooled annual period prevalence was 30.4 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 15.6-59.1). In community settings, the overall pooled annual incidence proportion of dementia due to AD among individuals 60+ was 34.1 per 1000 persons (CI95%: 16.4-70.9), and the incidence rate was 15.8 per 1000 person-years (CI95%: 12.9-19.4). Estimates varied significantly with age, diagnostic criteria used and location (i.e., continent).

The burden of AD dementia is substantial. Significant gaps in our understanding of its epidemiology were identified, even in a high-income country such as Canada. Future studies should assess the impact of using such newer clinical diagnostic criteria for AD dementia such as those of the National Institute on Aging–Alzheimer’s Association and/or incorporate validated biomarkers to confirm the presence of Alzheimer pathology to produce more precise estimates of the global burden of AD.

Dementia is a common neurological condition affecting many older individuals that leads to a loss of independence, diminished quality of life, premature mortality, caregiver burden and high levels of healthcare utilization and cost. This is an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the worldwide prevalence and incidence of dementia.

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for relevant studies published between 2000 (1985 for Canadian papers) and July of 2012. Papers selected for full-text review were included in the systematic review if they provided an original population-based estimate for the incidence and/or prevalence of dementia. The reference lists of included articles were also searched for additional studies. Two individuals independently performed abstract and full-text review, data extraction, and quality assessment of the papers. Random-effects models and/or meta-regression were used to generate pooled estimates by age, sex, setting (i.e., community, institution, both), diagnostic criteria utilized, location (i.e., continent) and year of data collection.

Of 16,066 abstracts screened, 707 articles were selected for full-text review. A total of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria. Among individuals 60 and over residing in the community, the pooled point and annual period prevalence estimates of dementia were 48.62 (CI95%: 41.98-56.32) and 69.07 (CI95%: 52.36-91.11) per 1000 persons, respectively. The respective pooled incidence rate (same age and setting) was 17.18 (CI95%: 13.90-21.23) per 1000 person-years, while the annual incidence proportion was 52.85 (CI95%: 33.08-84.42) per 1,000 persons. Increasing participant age was associated with a higher dementia prevalence and incidence. Annual period prevalence was higher in North America than in South America, Europe and Asia (in order of decreasing period prevalence) and higher in institutional compared to community and combined settings. Sex, diagnostic criteria (except for incidence proportion) and year of data collection were not associated with statistically significant different estimates of prevalence or incidence, though estimates were consistently higher for females than males.

Dementia is a common neurological condition in older individuals. Significant gaps in knowledge about its epidemiology were identified, particularly with regard to the incidence of dementia in low- and middle-income countries. Accurate estimates of prevalence and incidence of dementia are needed to plan for the health and social services that will be required to deal with an aging population.

The Consortium to Investigate Vascular Impairment of Cognition (CIVIC) is a Canadian, multi-centre, clinic-based prospective cohort study of patients with Vascular Cognitive Impairment (VCI). We report its organization and the impact of diagnostic criteria on the study of VCI.

Nine memory disability clinics enrolled patients and recorded their usual investigations and care. A case report form included all vascular dementia (VaD) individual criteria for each of four sets (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS-AIREN), Alzheimer’s Disease Diagnostic Treatment Centers (ADDTC), the ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders (ICD-10), and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV)) of consensus-based diagnostic criteria and for the Hachinski Ischemia Score (HIS). Investigators, having completed the case report form, were asked to make a clinical judgement about the cognitive diagnosis based on the best available information, including neuroimaging.

Of 1,347 patients (mean age 72 years; 56% women), 846 (63%) were diagnosed with dementia and 324 (24%) were diagnosed with VCI. The proportion of patients diagnosed with VaD by the diagnostic criteria was: 23.9% (n=322) by DSM-IV, 10.2% (n=137) by HIS, 4.3% (n=58) by ICD-10, 3.8% (n=51) by ADTCC, and 3.6% (n=48) by NINDS-AIREN. Judged against a clinical diagnosis of VaD, the sensitivity/specificity of each was: DSM-IV (0.77/0.80); HIS (0.41/0.92); ICD-10 (0.29/0.98); ADTCC (0.24/0.98); NINDS-AIREN (0.42/0.995). Compared with a clinical diagnosis of VCI, sensitivities were lower for the diagnostic criteria, reflecting the exclusion of patients who did not have dementia.

Consensus-based criteria for VaD omit patients who do not meet dementia criteria that are modeled on Alzheimer’s disease. Even for patients who do, the proportion identified with VaD varies widely. Criteria based on empirical analyses need to be developed and validated.

Subsequent to the development of consensus statements on a clinical topic, it is vital to establish a plan for dissemination, implementation and evaluation of impact. Consensus statements can be used for both guiding continuing medical education (CME) and producing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Insufficient attention to dissemination can lead to a failure to change physician behaviour and improve patient outcomes.

A plan to disseminate the conclusions of the Canadian Consensus Conference on Dementia (CCCD) was developed. This plan was based on a literature review of CME and CPGs. A Medline search was performed on the dissemination and evaluation of the 1989 Canadian Consensus Conference on the Assessment of Dementia (CCCAD) and other published guides for physicians on dementia care. CCCD dissemination that has occurred to date (June, 2000) was reviewed in this paper.

Lectures and unsolicited printed material are weak forms of CME. Small-group interactive CME that provides practice opportunities appears to be the most effective way to change physician behaviour. The ability of CPGs to change physician behaviour is uncertain. It appears that inadequate attention has been placed on CPG dissemination and implementation. The CCCAD had a modest impact on clinical practice in Canada. While dissemination of the conclusions of the CCCD has taken place, evaluation of the impact of the CCCD has yet to be done. Local initiatives utilizing the conclusions of the CCCD are on-going.

Further work is needed on how to optimize the impact of consensus statements and CPGs. While dissemination of the CCCD has occurred, it is currently unknown whether it has led to any change in physician practices.

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia in older adults. Acceptance of the cholinergic hypothesis led to a search for medications which could enhance central cholinergic activity in this condition. There are now three cholinesterase inhibitors available for the treatment of AD in Canada.

To review the currently available cholinesterase inhibitors approved for the treatment of AD in Canada and to provide guidance on who and how to treat with these agents.

Donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine are approved for the treatment of AD in Canada. In clinical trails, patients with mild to moderate AD treated with these agents experienced modest improvements in cognition, function, behaviour, and/or global clinical state. The magnitude of benefits seen with each agent appeared to be similar. While to date, there is no convincing evidence that one is more efficacious or effective, they do differ in their pharmacokinetics, additional mechanisms of action, and side effect profiles. Therefore, the selection of agent will be based on considerations such as side effect profiles, ease of administration, personal familiarity/experience, and beliefs about the importance of the noted differences in their pharmacokinetics and additional mechanisms of action.

We believe that these agents should be offered to all individuals with a mild to moderate dementia where Alzheimer’s pathology is felt to be a contributing factor. We view all three available cholinesterase inhibitors as first-line drugs.