Steps towards the implementation of amyloid‐PET in memory clinics: AMYPAD Diagnostic and Patient Management Study

• DOI: 10.1002/alz.062327
• Publication Date: 2022-12-20T16:42:55Z
• Authors: Daniele Altomare; Ingrid S. van Maurik; Camilla Caprioglio; Frederik Barkhof; Lyduine E. Collij; Philip Scheltens; Bart NM van Berckel; Isadora Lopes Alves; Valentina Garibotto; Christian Moro; Julien Delrieu; Jose Luis Molinuevo; Oriol Grau‐Rivera; Juan Domingo Gispert; Alexander Drzezga; Frank Jessen; Agneta K Nordberg; Zuzana Walker; Jean‐François Dem...; Rossella Gismondi; Gill Farrar; Andrew W Stephens; Johannes Berkhof; Giovanni B Frisoni
• Keywords: Memory clinic; Depression

Abstract Background Amyloid‐PET allows the assessment of amyloid deposition, one main hallmarks Alzheimer’s disease. However, in most countries, this exam is not routinely used clinical practice. Several studies have assessed physician‐centered outcomes, yet often without a randomized study design. In addition, choice to reimburse amyloid‐PET depends also on its cost‐effectiveness and safety procedure disclosure. Method We cost‐effectiveness, result disclosure AMYPAD‐DPMS cohort. Participants were memory clinic patients with subjective cognitive decline plus (SCD+), mild impairment (MCI) or dementia from 8 European clinics. They into three arms: ARM1, performed early diagnostic workup (within 1 month); ARM2, late (after 8±2 months); ARM3, if when managing physician chose to. To assess we collected information participants’ use healthcare resources (through patient diaries) health‐related outcomes (e.g. EQ‐5D‐5L, ICECAP‐O, Brief COPE, global cognition, anxiety, depression) at different time points. Impact SCD+ was through collection Event Scale – Revised (IES‐R) questionnaire anxiety depression (both before after disclosure). Result 88% ARM3 participants underwent within 3 months, average baseline prescribe 46 (IQR=58) days. observed that, diagnosis very high confidence (≥90%) more frequent who an (ARM1: 40%, 109/272) those for whom could be freely prescribed by physicians (ARM3: 37%, 97/261) as compared had undergone (ARM2: 11%, 30/260; p<0.001). More than 2500 diaries 100 IES‐R been throughout study. Preliminary results health economics impact will presented. Conclusion Our suggest that has relevant impact. Results cognitively unimpaired individuals might further contribute introduction