Martínez Gabriel, Vernooij Robin Wm, Fuentes Padilla Paulina, Zamora Javier, Bonfill Cosp Xavier, Flicker Leon
Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, C/ Sant Antoni Maria Claret 167, Pavelló 18 Planta 0, Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain, 08025.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 22;11(11):CD012216. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012216.pub2.
F-florbetapir uptake by brain tissue measured by positron emission tomography (PET) is accepted by regulatory agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicine Agencies (EMA) for assessing amyloid load in people with dementia. Its added value is mainly demonstrated by excluding Alzheimer's pathology in an established dementia diagnosis. However, the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA) revised the diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease and confidence in the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to Alzheimer's disease may be increased when using amyloid biomarkers tests like F-florbetapir. These tests, added to the MCI core clinical criteria, might increase the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of a testing strategy. However, the DTA of F-florbetapir to predict the progression from MCI to Alzheimer's disease dementia (ADD) or other dementias has not yet been systematically evaluated.
To determine the DTA of the F-florbetapir PET scan for detecting people with MCI at time of performing the test who will clinically progress to ADD, other forms of dementia (non-ADD), or any form of dementia at follow-up.
This review is current to May 2017. We searched MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), BIOSIS Citation Index (Thomson Reuters Web of Science), Web of Science Core Collection, including the Science Citation Index (Thomson Reuters Web of Science) and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index (Thomson Reuters Web of Science), LILACS (BIREME), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), ClinicalTrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) (http://www.who.int/ictrp/search/en/). We also searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia & Cognitive Improvement Group's specialised register of dementia studies (http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois/). We checked the reference lists of any relevant studies and systematic reviews, and performed citation tracking using the Science Citation Index to identify any additional relevant studies. No language or date restrictions were applied to the electronic searches.
We included studies that had prospectively defined cohorts with any accepted definition of MCI at time of performing the test and the use of F-florbetapir scan to evaluate the DTA of the progression from MCI to ADD or other forms of dementia. In addition, we only selected studies that applied a reference standard for Alzheimer's dementia diagnosis, for example, National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke and the Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association (NINCDS-ADRDA) or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (DSM-IV) criteria.
We screened all titles and abstracts identified in electronic-database searches. Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data to create two-by-two tables, showing the binary test results cross-classified with the binary reference standard. We used these data to calculate sensitivities, specificities, and their 95% confidence intervals. Two independent assessors performed quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool plus some additional items to assess the methodological quality of the included studies.
We included three studies, two of which evaluated the progression from MCI to ADD, and one evaluated the progression from MCI to any form of dementia.Progression from MCI to ADD was evaluated in 448 participants. The studies reported data on 401 participants with 1.6 years of follow-up and in 47 participants with three years of follow-up. Sixty-one (15.2%) participants converted at 1.6 years follow-up; nine (19.1%) participants converted at three years of follow-up.Progression from MCI to any form of dementia was evaluated in five participants with 1.5 years of follow-up, with three (60%) participants converting to any form of dementia.There were concerns regarding applicability in the reference standard in all three studies. Regarding the domain of flow and timing, two studies were considered at high risk of bias. MCI to ADD;Progression from MCI to ADD in those with a follow-up between two to less than four years had a sensitivity of 67% (95% CI 30 to 93) and a specificity of 71% (95% CI 54 to 85) by visual assessment (n = 47, 1 study).Progression from MCI to ADD in those with a follow-up between one to less than two years had a sensitivity of 89% (95% CI 78 to 95) and a specificity of 58% (95% CI 53 to 64) by visual assessment, and a sensitivity of 87% (95% CI 76 to 94) and a specificity of 51% (95% CI 45 to 56) by quantitative assessment by the standardised uptake value ratio (SUVR)(n = 401, 1 study). MCI to any form of dementia;Progression from MCI to any form of dementia in those with a follow-up between one to less than two years had a sensitivity of 67% (95% CI 9 to 99) and a specificity of 50% (95% CI 1 to 99) by visual assessment (n = 5, 1 study). MCI to any other forms of dementia (non-ADD);There was no information regarding the progression from MCI to any other form of dementia (non-ADD).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although sensitivity was good in one included study, considering the poor specificity and the limited data available in the literature, we cannot recommend routine use of F-florbetapir PET in clinical practice to predict the progression from MCI to ADD.Because of the poor sensitivity and specificity, limited number of included participants, and the limited data available in the literature, we cannot recommend its routine use in clinical practice to predict the progression from MCI to any form of dementia.Because of the high financial costs of F-florbetapir, clearly demonstrating the DTA and standardising the process of this modality are important prior to its wider use.
通过正电子发射断层扫描(PET)测量的脑组织对氟代贝他吡的摄取已被美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)和欧洲药品管理局(EMA)等监管机构认可,用于评估痴呆患者的淀粉样蛋白负荷。其附加价值主要体现在已确诊的痴呆诊断中排除阿尔茨海默病病理。然而,美国国立衰老研究所和阿尔茨海默病协会(NIA - AA)修订了阿尔茨海默病的诊断标准,并且使用像氟代贝他吡这样的淀粉样蛋白生物标志物检测可能会增加对阿尔茨海默病所致轻度认知障碍(MCI)诊断的信心。这些检测添加到MCI核心临床标准中,可能会提高检测策略的诊断测试准确性(DTA)。然而,氟代贝他吡预测MCI进展为阿尔茨海默病痴呆(ADD)或其他痴呆的DTA尚未得到系统评估。
确定氟代贝他吡PET扫描在检测进行测试时处于MCI阶段且在随访中临床进展为ADD、其他形式痴呆(非ADD)或任何形式痴呆的人群中的DTA。
本综述截至2017年5月。我们检索了MEDLINE(OvidSP)、Embase(OvidSP)、PsycINFO(OvidSP)、BIOSIS引文索引(汤森路透科学网)、科学网核心合集,包括科学引文索引(汤森路透科学网)和会议论文引文索引(汤森路透科学网)、LILACS(BIREME)、CINAHL(EBSCOhost)、ClinicalTrials.gov(https://clinicaltrials.gov)以及世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台(WHO ICTRP)(http://www.who.int/ictrp/search/en/)。我们还检索了ALOIS,即Cochrane痴呆与认知改善小组的痴呆研究专门注册库(http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois/)。我们检查了所有相关研究和系统评价的参考文献列表,并使用科学引文索引进行引文跟踪以识别任何其他相关研究。电子检索未设语言或日期限制。
我们纳入了那些前瞻性定义队列的研究,这些队列在进行测试时采用任何公认的MCI定义,并使用氟代贝他吡扫描来评估从MCI进展为ADD或其他形式痴呆的DTA。此外,我们仅选择应用了阿尔茨海默病痴呆诊断参考标准的研究,例如,美国国立神经疾病和中风研究所及阿尔茨海默病及相关疾病协会(NINCDS - ADRDA)或《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM - IV)标准。
我们筛选了电子数据库检索中识别出的所有标题和摘要。两位综述作者独立选择纳入研究并提取数据以创建二乘二表格,展示与二元参考标准交叉分类的二元测试结果。我们使用这些数据计算敏感性、特异性及其95%置信区间。两位独立评估者使用QUADAS - 2工具以及一些额外项目进行质量评估,以评估纳入研究的方法学质量。
我们纳入了三项研究,其中两项评估了从MCI进展为ADD,一项评估了从MCI进展为任何形式痴呆。448名参与者被评估了从MCI进展为ADD的情况。研究报告了401名参与者1.6年随访的数据以及47名参与者三年随访的数据。在1.6年随访时有61名(15.2%)参与者发生转化;在三年随访时有9名(19.1%)参与者发生转化。5名参与者被评估了从MCI进展为任何形式痴呆的情况,随访1.5年,其中3名(60%)参与者转化为任何形式痴呆。所有三项研究中关于参考标准的适用性均存在问题。关于流程和时间领域,两项研究被认为存在高偏倚风险。MCI至ADD;在随访时间为两年至不到四年的人群中,通过视觉评估,从MCI进展为ADD的敏感性为67%(95%CI 30至93),特异性为71%(95%CI 54至85)(n = 47,1项研究)。在随访时间为一年至不到两年的人群中,通过视觉评估,从MCI进展为ADD的敏感性为89%(95%CI 78至95),特异性为58%(95%CI 53至64),通过标准化摄取值比(SUVR)进行定量评估时,敏感性为87%(95%CI 76至94),特异性为51%(95%CI 45至56)(n = 401,1项研究)。MCI至任何形式痴呆;在随访时间为一年至不到两年的人群中,通过视觉评估,从MCI进展为任何形式痴呆的敏感性为67%(95%CI 9至99),特异性为50%(95%CI 1至99)(n = 5,1项研究)。MCI至任何其他形式痴呆(非ADD);没有关于从MCI进展为任何其他形式痴呆(非ADD)的信息。
尽管在一项纳入研究中敏感性良好,但考虑到特异性较差以及文献中可用数据有限,我们不建议在临床实践中常规使用氟代贝他吡PET来预测从MCI进展为ADD。由于敏感性和特异性较差、纳入参与者数量有限以及文献中可用数据有限,我们不建议在临床实践中常规使用它来预测从MCI进展为任何形式痴呆。鉴于氟代贝他吡的高财务成本,在其更广泛使用之前,明确证明其DTA并规范该方法的流程很重要。