MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406218141 · doi:10.1002/alz.091118

Potential Eligibility for Disease Modifying Therapies Among Individuals Referred to A Tertiary Care Memory Clinic in Calgary, Alberta, Canada: Implications for AD Biomarker Testing

2024· article· en· W4406218141 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gavin Thomas, Eric E. Smith, Zahinoor Ismail, Julia Kirkham, Pamela Roach, Zahra Goodarzi, Dallas Seitz

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTertiary careBiomarkerGerontologyDiseaseMedicineMemory clinicFamily medicinePsychiatryInternal medicineCognitive impairmentBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Potential disease modifying therapies (DMT) for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) may become available in Canada although it is unclear what percentage of people presenting to tertiary care memory programs may require beta‐amyloid testing be eligible for these treatments. We evaluated eligibility for potential DMTs among individuals in the Prospective Registry for Persons with Memory Symptoms (PROMPT) dementia research registry, comprising patients seen in a tertiary care cognitive clinic in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, based on cognitive criteria, medical history, and potential diagnosis of AD on clinical criteria. Method We analyzed all individuals included in the PROMPT registry from July 2010 to May 2023 who were diagnosed with either mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or possible or probable dementia at their baseline assessment. AD biomarker testing is not routinely available in this clinic. The characteristics of PROMPT participants were then compared to the inclusion criteria used in recent trials of three DMTs. The proportions of individuals in the PROMPT registry who were potentially eligible for DMTs were then determined. Result Of the 1,901 individuals in the PROMPT registry, 1,119 were diagnosed with MCI or dementia at their baseline visit (mean age 75 years and 54% male). Among the group with MCI or dementia, 86% (965) were diagnosed with either MCI or AD. Of the individuals diagnosed with MCI or AD, 55‐80% met cognitive test score eligibility for different DMTs at their initial clinic visit. Potential medical contraindications to treatment with DMTs were present in 27% of this sample. Of all individuals referred to the tertiary care cognitive disorders clinic diagnosed with MCI or AD, approximately 40‐58% could potentially be eligible for DMTs based on their initial clinic assessment. Of all individuals in the PROMPT dementia registry, between 20‐29% could potentially be candidates for DMTs pending neuroimaging and biomarker confirmation of eligibility. Conclusion A high proportion of memory clinic referrals are diagnosed with MCI or AD and are potentially eligible for DMTs and would require beta‐amyloid biomarker testing for eligibility confirmation. This information will help better define resource requirements for implementing AD DMTs should these become available in Canada.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicPharmaceutical Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207