Neuropsychology, Vol 38(4), May 2024, 337-346; doi:10.1037/neu0000938Objective: Large research cohorts show robust associations between neuropsychological tests and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) biomarkers, but studies in clinical settings are limited. The increasing availability of AD biomarkers to the practicing clinician makes it important to understand the relationship between comprehensive clinical neuropsychological assessment and biomarker status. This study examined concordance between practicing clinical neuropsychologists’ diagnostic impressions and AD biomarker status in patients seen at an outpatient medical center, with a secondary aim of defining the characteristics of discordant cases. Method: Participants (N = 79) seen for clinical neuropsychological assessment who subsequently underwent lumbar puncture or amyloid positron emission tomography imaging were identified via retrospective chart review. Concordance between clinical neuropsychological diagnosis (non-AD, indeterminate, possible/probable AD) and AD biomarker status (negative, indeterminate, positive) was determined. Individual test score data were used to examine between-group differences based on amyloid status. Results: AD biomarker positive and negative patients did not differ on individual neuropsychological tests after correcting for multiple comparisons, though the small number of AD biomarker indeterminate individuals performed better than biomarker positive patients. However, there was 76.7% concordance between neuropsychologists’ diagnostic impressions and AD biomarker status (88% sensitivity and 55% specificity of neuropsychological assessment in detecting AD biomarker status). AD biomarker negative patients diagnosed as possible/probable AD (discordant) versus non-AD (concordant) had significantly lower Neuropsychological Assessment Battery Story Delayed Recall, higher Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition Coding, and higher Trail-Making A (i.e., an amnestic memory profile). Conclusions: Comprehensive neuropsychological assessment showed modest concordance with AD biomarker status in patients seen in an outpatient medical center for routine clinical care. Low specificity for the clinical diagnosis of AD could be explained by the multiplicity of etiologies that cause memory impairment (i.e., TAR DNA-binding protein 43, suspected non-AD pathology). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
If you do not see content above, kindly GO TO SOURCE.
Not all publishers encode content in a way that enables republishing at Neuro.vip.
This post is Copyright: | February 8, 2024
Neuropsychology – Vol 38, Iss 4