Evaluating pre‐screening tools for older Latino recruitment into preclinical Alzheimer’s disease studies Neuropsychology/Multicultural issues in assessment of dementia

• Published in: Alzheimer's & dementia Vol. 16; no. S6
• Main Authors: Muniz, Martha C., Martínez, Jairo, Vila‐Castelar, Clara, Pardilla‐Delgado, Enmanuelle, Scott, Matthew R., Properzi, Michael J., Kirn, Dylan, Rentz, Dorene, Sperling, Reisa A., Quiroz, Yakeel T., Pruzin, Jeremy J., Ramirez‐Gomez, Liliana A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 01.12.2020
• ISSN: 1552-5260; 1552-5279
• DOI: 10.1002/alz.041571

Abstract Background Recruitment for preclinical Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials and observational studies in the Latino population continues to increase as researchers aim to diversify their samples. The Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status modified version (TICS‐m) is a pre‐screening tool that has shown to have high diagnostic validity for identification of dementia in mostly Caucasian samples. The TICS‐m cut‐off currently used for screening out cognitive impairment in older individuals is ≥26. We aimed to 1) determine whether currently used TICS‐m cut‐offs are appropriate for pre‐screening clinically normal older Latinos, and 2) assess the relationships among the TICS‐m score and outcome measures typically used in clinical trials, such as Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE), Logical Memory Delayed Recall, and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). Methods Twenty‐nine older Latino adults (mean age= 68.7, mean education=15.6, and mean TICS‐m= 33.4/40) from the Harvard Aging Brain Study (HABS) were included in this study. Participants completed the pre‐screening TICS‐m over the phone, followed by an in‐clinic screening neuropsychological battery, which included the MMSE, Logical Memory Delayed Recall, and CDR, administered in Spanish. Linear regression models controlling for age, sex, and education were used to assess the relationships between TICS‐m score and performance on the neuropsychological measures. Results TICS‐m scores were positively correlated with years of education (r=0.54, p=0.002). No significant associations were observed among TICS‐m scores and other cognitive measures, after adjusting by age, sex, and education (MMSE: r=0.04, p=0.82; Logical Memory Delayed: r=0.10, p=0.62; and CDR sum of boxes: r=‐0.03, p=0.86). Conclusion Preliminary results suggest that in this sample of largely cognitively normal Latino adults, TICS‐m score is not associated with performance in other cognitive outcome measures typically used in clinical and observational trials for preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. These findings also suggest that the TICS‐m may not accurately reflect actual cognitive function in older Latino participants. However, we do not know if we are inadvertently screen‐failing participants using TICS‐m as a pre‐screening tool. Further research is needed to assess whether this pre‐screening tool is adequate in the pre‐screening process for preclinical Alzheimer’s disease in older Latino adults.