Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT04309500

SHARE(D) Stage II: Alzheimer's Risk Disclosure Protocol Piloting

The goal of this study is to test efficacy and safety of person-centered, culturally-informed protocols for disclosure of different combinations of Alzheimer's dementia risk factors. Building on the results from a federally-funded assessment of preferences and needs of racially diverse participants and their respective friends/family members, in regard to Dementia - Alzheimer's Type (DAT), we have produced protocols for communication of DAT risk, with attention to specific adaptations in style or content based on individual factors and preferences. These protocols allow for communication of risk based on clinical history and diagnosis, structural neuroimaging, apolipoprotein-E status, and amyloid and tau burden on positron emission tomography. In particular, protocols specify (a) effective methods of communicating risk conferred by each data source, (b) information designed for patients versus informants, (c) psychoeducation needs, and (d) resource/support needs. We will recruit a randomly-selected subset of 10 dyads (including 5 participants who are Non-Hispanic African-American, 5 participants who are Non-Hispanic White) from the Stage I sample to whom we will develop and implement personalized DAT risk disclosure protocols. We will provide preliminary information on the effectiveness of these protocols in terms of patient/co-participant comprehension and recall of feedback provided, and initial changes in mood or behavior immediately following and shortly after risk disclosure sessions.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Mild Cognitive Impairment Cognition Disorders Cognitive Dysfunction Healthy Aging Mental Disorders Neurocognitive Disorders

Age range

65 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

University of Michigan Medical School, Department of Psychiatry

Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48105, United States

About this study

Currently, a divide exists between Dementia - Alzheimer's Type (DAT) risk information that is shared in clinical settings versus genetic and biomarker-based risk information gathered and, less frequently, disseminated in research settings. Clinical feedback continues to discuss DAT risk in terms of personal/family history, neuropsychological or neurological testing, and standard neuroimaging reports. Research advances in genotyping, quantitative neuroimaging, and amyloid and tau positron emission tomography (PET) have improved our risk prediction and disease staging; however, the literature on how to share these important findings is sparse. Effective risk disclosure protocols are fundamentally dependent on the needs of recipients. However, we do not know how patients, or those tasked with current or future caregiving, decide what sources or types of risk information they want disclosed, nor their reasons for preferring certain types of information over others. Given the differences between static (e.g., family history, genotyping) and dynamic, potentially modifiable risk factors (e.g., amyloid burden), as well as varying familiarity with research-based biomarkers, it is especially important to understand how much information patients hope to receive and what they hope to do with it. This knowledge gap is particularly pertinent in minority and low-income populations given systemic challenges and cultural beliefs that may affect their psychological, physical, and financial ability to adapt to a high risk profile. Thus, understanding risk disclosure needs and preferences is a critical step in developing culturally-informed feedback protocols.

Aim 1 (accomplished during the Stage I observational Needs Assessment - HUM00160276) was to investigate the preferences and needs of racially diverse participants, and their respective informants, in regards to receiving feedback about their risk for DAT.

Aim 2 is to develop person-centered, culturally-informed protocols for disclosure of different combinations of Alzheimer's dementia risk factors. Building on the results of Aim 1, we have produced protocols for communication of DAT risk, with attention to specific adaptations in style or content based on individual factors and preferences. In particular, protocols specify (a) effective methods of communicating risk conferred by each data source, (b) information designed for patients versus informants, (c) psychoeducation needs, and (d) resource/support needs. We will recruit a randomly-selected subset of 10 dyads (including 5 participants who are Non-Hispanic African-American, 5 participants who are Non-Hispanic White) from the Stage I sample to whom we will develop and implement personalized DAT risk disclosure protocols. We will provide preliminary information on the effectiveness of these protocols in terms of patient/co-participant comprehension and recall of feedback provided, and initial changes in mood or behavior immediately following and shortly after risk disclosure sessions.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • age 65+ years
  • Non-Hispanic Black or Non-Hispanic White race/ethnicity
  • Previously participated in Stage I (observational needs assessment)
  • Have completed an initial evaluation as part of the University of Michigan Memory and Aging Project (UM-MAP), Stimulation to Improve Memory (STIM) study, or the DAPPER study within the last 12 months.
  • Diagnosed with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment (MCI; single- or -multiple domain, amnestic or non-amnestic forms)
  • Able to identify a co-participant who is currently the participant's caregiver, or would serve in this role in the future if needed, and well-known to the participant (known for ≥5 years and have at least weekly phone or in-person contact)
  • Able to identify a co-participant who is 18+ years old.
  • Able to identify a co-participant who is cognitively healthy

Exclusion criteria

  • Current or historical neurologic disorder (e.g., Alzheimer's dementia or other neurodegenerative dementia, Parkinson's disease, seizure disorder, tumor, multiple sclerosis)
  • Current or historical significant neurologic injury (e.g., significant stroke or moderate-severe head injury, defined by loss of consciousness > 5 minutes, presence of significant post-traumatic amnesia, or the need for extended hospitalization or intervention).
  • Motor symptoms indicative of a neurodegenerative etiology other than Alzheimer's disease
  • Severe mental illness (i.e., bipolar disorder, thought disorder, psychosis)
  • Severe substance use disorder

Treatment and study plan

Personalized DAT Risk Disclosure Protocol

Behavioral

Individual participants and their co-participants will receive information about the participant's DAT risk based on their clinical history, structural magnetic resonance imaging, apolipoprotein-E (APO-E) genotype, and amyloid and tau burden on positron emission tomography (PET) scanning. This session will include consent, psychoeducation, re-consent, personal risk feedback, action suggestions, participant/caregiver resources, and a written summary of results. Risk assessment and safety planning will be applied if needed.

Primary outcomes

  1. Comprehension/Recall of Results - Personal Information Score - PARTICIPANT

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    Participants were asked a series of multiple choice and true/false questions about their understanding or memory of the participant's current diagnosis, structural neuroimaging, APO-E genotype, and amyloid and/or tau positivity. Scores were on a range of 0 - 100 percent correct.

  2. Comprehension/Recall of Results - Personal Information Score - CO-PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    Co-participants were asked a series of multiple choice and true/false questions about their understanding or memory of the participant's current diagnosis, structural neuroimaging, APO-E genotype, and amyloid and/or tau positivity. Scores were on a range of 0 - 100 percent correct.

  3. Comprehension/Recall of Results - Meaning of Risk Information Score - PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    Participants were asked a series of multiple choice and true/false questions about their understanding or memory of the meaning of the participant's current diagnosis, structural neuroimaging, APO-E genotype, and amyloid and/or tau positivity (i.e., whether their profile on each of these indicators was related to increased, decreased, or unclear risk for DAT). Scores were on a range of 0 - 100 percent correct.

  4. Comprehension/Recall of Results - Meaning of Risk Information Score - CO-PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    Co-participants were asked a series of multiple choice and true/false questions about their understanding or memory of the meaning of the participant's current diagnosis, structural neuroimaging, APO-E genotype, and amyloid and/or tau positivity (i.e., whether their profile on each of these indicators was related to increased, decreased, or unclear risk for DAT). Scores were on a range of 0 - 100 percent correct.

  5. Geriatric Depression Scale - Short Form (GDS-15) - PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    A 15-item assessment of depressive symptoms that was adapted to remove common depression symptoms often conflated with normal aging (i.e., somatic symptoms).Participant were asked to rate the presence of mood symptoms over the past two weeks. Scores for the assessment ranged from 0-15, with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms

  6. Geriatric Depression Scale - Short Form (GDS-15) - CO-PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    A 15-item assessment of depressive symptoms that was adapted to remove common depression symptoms often conflated with normal aging (i.e., somatic symptoms). Co-participant were asked to rate the presence of mood symptoms over the past two weeks. Scores for the assessment ranged from 0-15, with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms

  7. Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) - PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    A 21-item measure of the perceived severity ('not at all' to 'severely') at which the participant was experiencing anxiety symptoms over the past week, validated for use with older adults. Scores ranged from 0-63, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety.

  8. Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) - CO-PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    A 21-item measure of the perceived severity ('not at all' to 'severely') at which the co-participant was experiencing anxiety symptoms over the past week, validated for use with older adults. Scores ranged from 0-63, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety.

  9. The Impact of Genetic Testing for AD (IGT-AD; Positive Subscale) - PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    The Impact of Genetic Testing for AD (IGT-AD) (positive subscale) was a 4-item self-report measure that assessed two positive and negative emotional responses to genetic AD risk disclosure. This scale was adapted to more broadly assess the 'life event' of receiving DAT risk disclosure based on multiple indicators. Participants completed this to assess their reactions to the participant receiving risk feedback. Possible scores ranged from 0 - 60, where 0 meant fewest positive reactions and 20 was most (strongest) positive reactions.

  10. The Impact of Genetic Testing for AD (IGT-AD; Positive Subscale) - CO-PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    The Impact of Genetic Testing for AD (IGT-AD) (positive subscale) was a 4-item self-report measure that assessed two positive and negative emotional responses to genetic AD risk disclosure. This scale was adapted to more broadly assess the 'life event' of receiving DAT risk disclosure based on multiple indicators. Co-participants completed this to assess their reactions to the participant receiving risk feedback. Scores ranged from 0 - 60, where 0 meant fewest positive reactions and 20 was most (strongest) positive reactions.

  11. The Impact of Genetic Testing for AD (IGT-AD; Distress Subscale) - PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    The Impact of Genetic Testing for AD (IGT-AD) was a 16-item self-report measure that assessed two positive and negative emotional responses to genetic AD risk disclosure. This scale was adapted to more broadly assess the 'life event' of receiving DAT risk disclosure based on multiple indicators. Participants completed this to assess their reactions to the participant receiving risk feedback.

    The Distress subscale scores ranged from 0-60, with higher scores indicating greater distress about test results.

  12. The Impact of Genetic Testing for AD (IGT-AD; Distress Subscale) - CO-PARTICIPANTS

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure, at 1 week, and at 6 weeks after disclosure

    The Impact of Genetic Testing for AD (IGT-AD) was a 16-item self-report measure that assessed two positive and negative emotional responses to genetic AD risk disclosure. This scale was adapted to more broadly assess the 'life event' of receiving DAT risk disclosure based on multiple indicators. Participants completed this to assess their reactions to the participant receiving risk feedback.

    The Distress subscale scores ranged from 0-60, with higher scores indicating greater distress about test results.

Other outcomes

  1. Comprehension of Results - Qualitative Impressions

    Time frame: Administered immediately after risk disclosure; 1 week later, and 6 weeks later

    Participants and co-participants were asked to explain, in their own words and without cuing, their impressions of the messages they received about the participant's clinical history, structural neuroimaging, genetic profile, and amyloid and tau biomarkers, as well as the risk for DAT conferred by those markers. Responses were transcribed and coded to determine core themes and understanding of risk messages.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Michigan

Other

Collaborators

  • National Institute on Aging (NIA)

Registry information

Official study title

Development of Culturally-Sensitive and Patient-Centered Feedback for Alzheimer's Dementia Risk Disclosure

Acronym: SHARE(D)

Important dates

Study start
2021
Primary completion
2022
Study completion
2022
First posted
Mar 16, 2020
Registry last updated
Feb 16, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.