Back

A multimodal intervention for Alzheimer's disease results in multifaceted systemic effects reflected in blood and ameliorates functional and cognitive outcomes

Roach, J. C.; Edens, L.; Markewych, D. R.; Rapozo, M. K.; Hara, J.; Glusman, G.; Funk, C.; Bramen, J.; Baloni, P.; Shankle, W. R.; Hood, L.

2022-09-29 geriatric medicine
10.1101/2022.09.27.22280385
Show abstract

IntroductionComprehensive treatment of Alzheimers disease and related dementias (ADRD) requires not only pharmacologic treatment but also management of existing medical conditions and lifestyle modifications including diet, cognitive training, and exercise. The Coaching for Cognition in Alzheimers (COCOA) trial was a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test the hypothesis that a remotely coached multimodal lifestyle intervention would improve early-stage Alzheimers disease (AD). AD results from the interplay of multiple interacting dysfunctional biological systems. Specific causes of AD differ between individuals. Personalized, multimodal therapies are needed to best prevent and treat AD. COCOA collected psychometric, clinical, lifestyle, genomic, proteomic, metabolomic and microbiome data at multiple timepoints across two years for each participant. These data enable systems-biology analyses. We report analyses of the first COCOA data freeze. This analysis includes an evaluation of the effect of the intervention on outcome measures. It also includes systems analyses to identify molecular mediators that convey the effect of personalized multimodal lifestyle interventions on amelioration of cognitive trajectory. MethodsA total of 55 participants with early-stage AD from Southern California were randomized into two parallel arms. Arm 1 (control; N=24) received standard of care. Arm 2 (intervention; N=31) also received telephonic personalized coaching for multiple lifestyle interventions including diet, exercise, and cognitive training. COCOAs overarching aim was to gather dense molecular data from an AD cohort to improve understanding of pathophysiology and advance treatment. For the RCT, COCOAs objective was to test the hypothesis that the Memory Performance Index (MPI) trajectory would be better in the intervention arm than in the control arm. The Functional Assessment Staging Test (FAST) was assessed for a secondary outcome. Assessments were blinded. The nature of the intervention precluded participant blinding. ResultsThe intervention arm ameliorated 2.6 {+/-} 0.8 MPI points (p = 0.0007; N = 48) compared to the control arm over the two-year intervention. Top-ranked candidate mediators included: albumin, propionylcarnitine, sphingomyelin, hexadecanedioate, acetylkynurenine, tiglylcarnitine, IL18R1, palmitoyl-sphingosine-phosphoethanolamine, acetyltryptophan, and IL17D. These individual molecules implicated inflammatory and nitrogen/tryptophan metabolism pathways. No important adverse events or side effects were observed. ConclusionsClinical trials should include frequent assessment of dense data to maximize knowledge gained. Such knowledge is useful not only in testing a primary hypothesis, but also in advancing basic biological and pathophysiological knowledge, understanding mechanisms explaining trial results, generating synergistic knowledge tangential to preconceived hypotheses, and refining interventions for clinical translation. Data from every trial should allow an intervention to be refined and then tested in future trials, driving iterative improvement. Multimodal lifestyle interventions are effective for ameliorating cognitive decline and may have an effect size larger than pharmacological interventions. Effects may be molecularly idiosyncratic; personalization of interventions is important. Dietary changes and exercise are likely to be beneficial components of multimodal interventions in many individuals. Remote coaching is an effective intervention for early stage ADRD. Remote interventions were effective during the COVID pandemic.

Matching journals

1
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Wiley · based on 84 published papers
#1
116× avg
2
Alzheimer's & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions
Wiley · based on 13 published papers
Top 0.1%
83× avg
3
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 31 published papers
Top 2%
17× avg
4
GeroScience
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 22 published papers
Top 0.4%
42× avg
5
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
SAGE Publications · based on 31 published papers
Top 2%
14× avg
6
PLOS ONE
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 1737 published papers
Top 88%
1.7%
7
The Journals of Gerontology: Series A
Oxford University Press (OUP) · based on 19 published papers
Top 1%
12× avg
8
Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring
Wiley · based on 28 published papers
Top 2%
9.9× avg
9
The Journals of Gerontology, Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
Oxford University Press (OUP) · based on 15 published papers
Top 1%
15× avg
10
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Wiley · based on 12 published papers
Top 0.8%
15× avg
11
Nature Medicine
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 88 published papers
Top 13%
1.7× avg
12
Translational Psychiatry
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 94 published papers
Top 7%
1.7× avg
13
Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
Elsevier BV · based on 12 published papers
Top 1%
10× avg
14
Advanced Science
Wiley · based on 12 published papers
Top 2%
6.4× avg
15
Age and Ageing
Oxford University Press (OUP) · based on 27 published papers
Top 2%
4.4× avg
16
International Journal of Epidemiology
Oxford University Press (OUP) · based on 65 published papers
Top 11%
1.6× avg
17
Aging Cell
Wiley · based on 21 published papers
Top 2%
4.3× avg
18
Brain
Oxford University Press (OUP) · based on 69 published papers
Top 8%
0.5%
19
The Lancet Healthy Longevity
Elsevier BV · based on 11 published papers
Top 0.5%
19× avg
20
Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease
SAGE Publications · based on 23 published papers
Top 4%
3.1× avg
21
Aging
Impact Journals, LLC · based on 18 published papers
Top 5%
3.5× avg
22
Scientific Reports
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 701 published papers
Top 88%
0.5%
23
PLOS Medicine
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 95 published papers
Top 19%
0.5%