Feasibility of Identifying Aerobic‐Fitness Responses to Aerobic Exercise in Alzheimer's Disease: The FIT‐AD SMART Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness following moderate-intensity continuous aerobic training (MICT) are well-documented but show variability across individuals. This heterogeneity among older adults may contribute to inconsistent findings regarding the effects of MICT on cognition in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: This presentation will examine the feasibility of using aerobic fitness, as measured by peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) through a symptom-limited cycle-ergometer test, to identify non-responders to MICT and adapt exercises from the FIT-AD Sequential, Multiple Assignment, Randomized Trial (SMART). FIT-AD SMART aims to enroll 108 older adults with early AD, assigning 72 to MICT and 36 to stretching exercises for six months. After three months, VO2peak is reassessed to identify non-responses, defined as <5% improvement in VO2peak from baseline. Non-responders are re-randomized to either high-intensity interval training or a combined aerobic and resistance exercise program, while responders continue with MICT for another three months. RESULTS: As of January 2, 2025, 19 participants had passed the 3-month assessment period. They were 70.95±5.75 years of age, had 16.05±2.74 years of education, and scored 22.74±3.51 on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). About 57.1% of the participants were female, and 28.6% were Hispanic. Their VO2peak averaged 18.72±4.75 mL/kg/min at baseline and 21.73±6.91 mL/kg/min at three months, representing a mean improvement of 6.93%±10.43%. Among the 19 participants, 13 were randomized to MICT and 11 completed 3-month exercise testing. The 11 MICT participants' VO2peak was 19.05 mL/kg/min at baseline and 20.40 mL/kg/min at 3 months, representing a 15.2% increase. Six of the MICT participants were classified as non-responders (VO2peak change: -2.96%±8.85%), and five were responders (VO2peak change: 36.9%±51.9%). In contrast, VO2peak of the stretching group (n = 6) decreased 6.2%. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that VO2peak did not improve among half of participants assigned to MICT following 3-months of training, although the amount of improvement was considerable among responders. These findings underscore the importance of using VO2peak as a key physiological marker for identifying exercise non-response in older adults with AD early during exercise interventions. Subsequent tailoring of exercise interventions following non-response to MICT may help maximize the benefits of aerobic exercise on cognitive health.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".