Symptomatic Treatment of Vascular Cognitive Impairment (STREAM-VCI): Protocol for a Cross-Over Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: People with vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) constitute a clinically heterogeneous group, but previous symptomatic drug trials in VCI did not take this clinical heterogeneity into account. Executive dysfunction and memory impairment are the cognitive domains that are most frequently impaired in VCI, and these impairments are likely to reflect vascular damage to specific neurotransmitter systems, which opens the possibility for targeted symptomatic treatment directed at specific neurotransmitters. OBJECTIVE: Here we describe the design of the "Symptomatic Treatment of Vascular Cognitive Impairment" (STREAM-VCI) trial. In this proof-of-concept study, we investigate whether people with VCI with executive dysfunction due to vascular damage to the monoaminergic neurotransmitter system differentially respond to a monoaminergic challenge, whereas people with VCI with memory dysfunction associated with vascular damage to the cholinergic system will in turn respond to a cholinergic challenge. METHODS: The STREAM-VCI is a single center, double blind, three-way cross-over trial among 30 people with VCI, in which subjects received a single dose of galantamine, methylphenidate, or placebo on separate occasions. The most important inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of VCI with a Mini-Mental State Examination score of ≥16 and a Clinical Dementia Rating of 0.5-1.0. For each person, the challenges consisted of a single 16 mg dose of galantamine, 10 mg of methylphenidate, and placebo, in random order on three separate visits. Change in performance in executive functioning and memory was assessed directly after the challenge using standardized neuropsychological tests. We will correlate a positive response to the cholinergic and monoaminergic treatment with differences in structural and functional connectivity at baseline using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), diffusion tension MRI, and resting-state functional MRI. RESULTS: The protocol of this study is approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of VU University Medical Center and the competent authority. The first participant was enrolled in April 2014. In September 2017, enrolment for the study was completed. We expect to publish the results in 2018. CONCLUSIONS: STREAM-VCI is the first study to investigate the association of a response to a cholinergic and monoaminergic treatment with structural and functional connectivity of the monoaminergic and/or cholinergic systems on MRI. We aim to predict on an individual basis which individuals show a positive response to a cholinergic and/or monoaminergic challenge in people with VCI. This may be instrumental in moving in the direction of individually-tailored pharmacological interventions based on MRI measures in people with VCI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02098824; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02098824 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6xhO7Ya1q).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.015 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".