MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117246615 · doi:10.1002/alz70857_106844

Antioxidant <i>N</i> ‐acetylcysteine as an intervention for neuropsychiatric symptoms in individuals with vascular mild cognitive impairment

2025· article· en· W7117246615 on OpenAlexaff
Alan Peng, Yejin Kang, Damien Gallagher, Nathan Herrmann, Zahinoor Ismail, Sandra E. Black, Alex Kiss, P. OH, Joel Ramirez, Walter Swardfager, Kate Survilla, Ethan Mah, Danielle Fernanda Fernandes. Vieira, Krista L Lanctôt

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of CalgaryHotchkiss Brain InstituteSunnybrook HospitalHealth Sciences CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApathyCognitive impairmentIntervention (counseling)CognitionAntioxidantDiseaseActivities of daily living

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are non-cognitive changes that often co-occur with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and independently increase the risk of progression to dementia. Of the NPS, apathy is a particularly strong risk factor. Oxidative stress and vascular risk factors of dementia have been implicated together to contribute to neurodegeneration. We previously found that oxidative stress biomarkers in individuals with vascular MCI (vMCI) were associated with apathy, suggesting antioxidants may be potential treatments. Here, we explored the efficacy of antioxidant N-acetylcysteine (NAC) as a treatment for NPS in individuals with vMCI. METHOD: This is a secondary analysis from a double-blind, RCT ("MOVE-IT") that was conducted on exercising older adults with vMCI (cardiovascular diseases and ≥1 SD below the norm in executive function, processing speed, memory, or working memory). Participants were recruited from a cardiac rehabilitation program. Over 24 weeks, participants received either 2400mg of NAC or placebo as treatment. Neuropsychiatric assessments were taken at weeks 0, 12, and 24. The Mild Behavioural Impairment Checklist (MBI-C) was used to capture five main domains of pre-dementia NPS: apathy, emotional dysregulation (ED), impulse control, social inappropriateness, and psychosis. RESULT: All 59 participants (n = 29 NAC, n = 30 Placebo, 69% male, mean[SD]: age=67.6[7.7], BMI=27.4[5.5], MoCA=22.5[3.2]) provided MBI-C data for this analysis. Zero-inflated Poisson mixed models with subject as random effect were used to address the high proportion of participants without NPS and to fit the incremental severity scores in each MBI-C domain. Covariates included age, sex, and number of cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, coronary artery disease, hypercholesterolemia, dyslipidemia, type-2 diabetes, > 5-year smoking history, obesity). Significant treatment effects over time were observed for apathy (Baseline: 56% apathy+, β[SD] = -1.35[.415], z = -3.26, p = .001) and ED (Baseline: 54% ED+, β[SD] = -.731[.306], z = -2.03, p = .043) scores at week 12. On average, scores decreased more in the NAC group (mean[SD]: apathy = -1.56[3.27], ED = -2.04[4.20]) than in the placebo group (mean[SD]: apathy = -0.296[1.66], ED = -0.481[1.67]) after 12 weeks. No treatment effects were observed for the other domains. CONCLUSION: The findings support NAC as a potential treatment for apathy and emotional dysregulation in individuals with vMCI and at risk of dementia, thereby reducing associated burdens.

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)0.001
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designNon-randomized 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207