MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3112539438 · doi:10.1002/alz.037961

Improved brain energetics and cognition after a 6‐month ketogenic intervention in mild cognitive impairment: Final results of the Benefic Trial

2020· article· en· W3112539438 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephen C. Cunnane, Mélanie Fortier, Christian‐Alexandre Castellano, Valerie St. Pierre, Marie‐Christine Morin, Francis Langlois, Bernard Cuenoud, Carla Delannoy, Christian Bocti, Tamàs Fülöp

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionPlaceboPsychologyAudiologyStroop effectCognitive trainingEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceRandomized controlled trialVerbal fluency testMedicinePhysical therapyInternal medicineNeuropsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Ketones can partially substitute for glucose as a brain fuel and may be beneficial for cognition in older people. The objective of the randomized, placebo‐controlled Benefic Trial (NCT02551419) was to assess whether counteracting the brain energy (glucose) deficit with a ketogenic medium chain triglyceride (kMCT) supplement could improve cognitive performance in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods A cognitive battery was used to screen for MCI and cognitive outcomes after the intervention. Cognitive outcomes pre‐ and post‐intervention were obtained for the active arm (15 g kMCT twice/day in a lactose‐free skim milk emulsion; n=39 completers) and placebo arm (non‐ketogenic vegetable oil of equivalent energy value and formulation as for the kMCT; n=44 completers). Brain ketone and glucose PET were done before and at the end of the 6‐month intervention on a sub‐group of both arms (n=19/group). Results Several cognitive domains improved post‐intervention in the kMCT group (p≤0.01; ANCOVA; age and education as covariates). Specifically, Trial 1 of the Free and Cued Recall Test showed a +1 word improvement on kMCT (+0.5 Δ Z‐score), correct answers on the Verbal Fluency Test increased by 2 words on kMCT (+0.3 Δ Z‐score) but decreased by 1 word on placebo (‐0.1 Δ Z‐score), correct answers on the Boston Naming Test increased by 1.1 on kMCT only, time taken on the Stroop Colour Naming Test decreased by 1 sec on the kMCT (p=0.09), and errors on the Trail Making Test decreased by 0.9 on kMCT but increased by 0.8 on placebo (p=0.02). Brain ketone uptake increased in the kMCT arm only and directly as the increase in plasma ketones (r = 0.87, p<0.01). Average drop‐out rate on both arms was 31% and, in completers, protocol adherence was 89% over six months. Conclusions In MCI, a kMCT supplement had a clinically meaningful effect on some cognitive outcomes directly related to risk of progression toward Alzheimer’s disease, and significantly improved brain energy supply. It is feasible for an MCI population to consume a kMCT supplement daily for six months. Acknowledgements: Financial support was provided by the Alzheimer Association USA, FRQS, Université de Sherbrooke and Nestlé Health Science.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDiet and metabolism studies→French-language works237,207→