Factors Associated with Lumbar Puncture Participation in Alzheimer's Disease Research.
Biomarkers
community participation
lumbar puncture
research subject recruitment
Journal
Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD
ISSN: 1875-8908
Titre abrégé: J Alzheimers Dis
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9814863
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
pubmed:
15
9
2020
medline:
11
9
2021
entrez:
14
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) provides insight into the spectrum of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. While lumbar punctures (LPs) for CSF collection are generally considered safe procedures, many participants remain hesitant to participate in research involving LPs. To explore factors associated with participant willingness to undergo a research LP at baseline and follow-up research study visit. We analyzed data from 700 participants with varying cognition (unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia) in the Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research Center. We evaluated the relationship of demographic variables (age, sex, race, ethnicity, and years of education) and clinical variables (waist-to-hip ratio, body mass index, AD parental history, cognitive diagnosis) on decision to undergo baseline LP1. We evaluated the relationship of prior LP1 experience (procedure success and adverse events) with the decision to undergo follow-up LP2. The strongest predictors were incorporated into regression models. Over half of eligible participants opted into both baseline and follow-up LP. Participants who underwent LP1 had higher mean education than those who declined (p = 0.020). White participants were more likely to choose to undergo LP1 (p < 0.001); 33% of African American participants opted in compared to 65% of white participants. Controlling for age, education, and AD parental history, race was the only significant predictor for LP1 participation. Controlling for LP1 mild adverse events, successful LP1 predicted LP2 participation. Race was the most important predictor of baseline LP participation, and successful prior LP was the most important predictor of follow-up LP participation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) provides insight into the spectrum of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. While lumbar punctures (LPs) for CSF collection are generally considered safe procedures, many participants remain hesitant to participate in research involving LPs.
OBJECTIVE
To explore factors associated with participant willingness to undergo a research LP at baseline and follow-up research study visit.
METHODS
We analyzed data from 700 participants with varying cognition (unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia) in the Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research Center. We evaluated the relationship of demographic variables (age, sex, race, ethnicity, and years of education) and clinical variables (waist-to-hip ratio, body mass index, AD parental history, cognitive diagnosis) on decision to undergo baseline LP1. We evaluated the relationship of prior LP1 experience (procedure success and adverse events) with the decision to undergo follow-up LP2. The strongest predictors were incorporated into regression models.
RESULTS
Over half of eligible participants opted into both baseline and follow-up LP. Participants who underwent LP1 had higher mean education than those who declined (p = 0.020). White participants were more likely to choose to undergo LP1 (p < 0.001); 33% of African American participants opted in compared to 65% of white participants. Controlling for age, education, and AD parental history, race was the only significant predictor for LP1 participation. Controlling for LP1 mild adverse events, successful LP1 predicted LP2 participation.
CONCLUSION
Race was the most important predictor of baseline LP participation, and successful prior LP was the most important predictor of follow-up LP participation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32925041
pii: JAD200394
doi: 10.3233/JAD-200394
pmc: PMC7683076
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1559-1567Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : P30 AG062715
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : P50 AG033514
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : R01 AG054059
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR002373
Pays : United States
Références
Alzheimers Dement. 2018 Apr;14(4):535-562
pubmed: 29653606
J Alzheimers Dis. 2014;39(4):719-26
pubmed: 24254700
Clin Transl Sci. 2015 Oct;8(5):460-6
pubmed: 25974328
J Alzheimers Dis. 2015;50(1):71-6
pubmed: 26639973
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Aug 08;16:198
pubmed: 27502925
Am J Public Health. 2012 Nov;102(11):e19-33
pubmed: 22994280
Neurology. 2018 May 22;90(21):981-987
pubmed: 29784718
Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2020 Feb 06;12(1):e12003
pubmed: 32211499
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 Aug;56(8):1522-7
pubmed: 18662204
Clin Interv Aging. 2017 Dec 22;13:43-50
pubmed: 29317809
JAMA Neurol. 2015 Mar;72(3):325-32
pubmed: 25622095
Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2017 Oct-Dec;31(4):287-294
pubmed: 28891819
Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2010 Jul-Sep;24 Suppl:S24-9
pubmed: 20711059
Can J Neurol Sci. 2019 Jan;46(1):79-82
pubmed: 30419981
Neurology. 2015 Oct 6;85(14):1240-9
pubmed: 26354982
Arch Neurol. 1994 Sep;51(9):901-6
pubmed: 8080390
Curr Alzheimer Res. 2009 Jun;6(3):290-2
pubmed: 19519311
Med Care. 2018 Oct;56 Suppl 10 Suppl 1:S6-S8
pubmed: 30015725
Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2019 Nov 19;5:751-770
pubmed: 31921966
J Neurol. 2020 Jul;267(7):2002-2006
pubmed: 32198714
Alzheimers Dement. 2016 Feb;12(2):154-163
pubmed: 26368321
Front Aging Neurosci. 2019 May 31;11:125
pubmed: 31214014
J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2010 Aug;21(3):879-97
pubmed: 20693733
Front Aging Neurosci. 2017 Feb 10;9:22
pubmed: 28239349
Acad Emerg Med. 2019 Jan;26(1):85-96
pubmed: 30129102
Front Aging Neurosci. 2016 Dec 02;8:296
pubmed: 27994549
Neurology. 2012 Jul 10;79(2):132-7
pubmed: 22675080