IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0247427.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The combination of MMSE with VSRAD and eZIS has greater accuracy for discriminating mild cognitive impairment from early Alzheimer’s disease than MMSE alone

Author

Listed:
  • Keita Tokumitsu
  • Norio Yasui-Furukori
  • Junko Takeuchi
  • Koji Yachimori
  • Norio Sugawara
  • Yoshio Terayama
  • Nobuyuki Tanaka
  • Tatsunori Naraoka
  • Kazutaka Shimoda

Abstract

Background: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is assessed by carefully examining a patient’s cognitive impairment. However, previous studies reported inadequate diagnostic accuracy for dementia in primary care settings. Many hospitals use the automated quantitative evaluation method known as the Voxel-based Specific Regional Analysis System for Alzheimer’s Disease (VSRAD), wherein brain MRI data are used to evaluate brain morphological abnormalities associated with AD. Similarly, an automated quantitative evaluation application called the easy Z-score imaging system (eZIS), which uses brain SPECT data to detect regional cerebral blood flow decreases associated with AD, is widely used. These applications have several indicators, each of which is known to correlate with the degree of AD. However, it is not completely known whether these indicators work better when used in combination in real-world clinical practice. Methods: We included 112 participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 128 participants with early AD in this study. All participants underwent MRI, SPECT, and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Demographic and clinical characteristics were assessed by univariate analysis, and logistic regression analysis with a combination of MMSE, VSRAD and eZIS indicators was performed to verify whether the diagnostic accuracy in discriminating between MCI and early AD was improved. Results: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the MMSE score alone was 0.835. The AUC was significantly improved to 0.870 by combining the MMSE score with two quantitative indicators from the VSRAD and eZIS that assessed the extent of brain abnormalities. Conclusion: Compared with the MMSE score alone, the combination of the MMSE score with the VSRAD and eZIS indicators significantly improves the accuracy of discrimination between patients with MCI and early AD. Implementing VSRAD and eZIS does not require professional clinical experience in the treatment of dementia. Therefore, the accuracy of dementia diagnosis by physicians may easily be improved in real-world primary care settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Keita Tokumitsu & Norio Yasui-Furukori & Junko Takeuchi & Koji Yachimori & Norio Sugawara & Yoshio Terayama & Nobuyuki Tanaka & Tatsunori Naraoka & Kazutaka Shimoda, 2021. "The combination of MMSE with VSRAD and eZIS has greater accuracy for discriminating mild cognitive impairment from early Alzheimer’s disease than MMSE alone," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-13, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247427
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247427
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247427&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0247427?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0247427. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.