AGEADJUSTED NORMATIVE DATA AND DISCRIMINATIVE VALIDITY OF COGNITIVE TESTS IN THE UKRAINIAN ADULT PATIENTS WITH MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34287/MMT.2(49).2021.1Abstract
Purpose of the study. We aimed: 1) to compare cognitive functioning in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and healthy controls (HC) in the Ukrainian adult population by the results of neuropsychological assessment, that included Perceived Deficit Questionnaire (PDQ5), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), Trail Making Test Part B (TMTB), Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST); 2) to obtain age adjusted normative data of RAVLT, TMTB, and DSST tests; 3) to explore the diagnostic utility of PDQ5, RAVLT, TMTB, and DSST tests to separate patients with MDD from HC; 4) to provide cutoff scores of the PDQ5, RAVLT, TMTB, and DSST tests, stratified by age, that discriminate MDD patients from HC, based on the sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of the obtained scores.
Materials and methods. 130 MDD medication free patients (according to DSM5) and 70 HC were enrolled in the study. Psychopathological (by MontgomeryAsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Clinical Global Impression Severity (CGIS)) and neuropsychological (by PDQ5, RAVLT, TMTB, DSST) parameters were analyzed in all subjects. To assess betweengroup differences parametric and nonparametric tests were used (Ttest, MannWhitney test, chisquared test). Areas under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) were calculated to determine if the results of PDQ5, RAVLT, TMTB, and DSST tests` performance could discriminate MDD patients from HC. Cutoff scores, which separated MDD patients from HC with empirical optimal Se and Sp, were derived from the ROC curves. The statistical threshold was set at p < 0.05.
Results. Surveyed groups were comparable in age, gender, and level of education. Besides the expected statistical difference in MDD patients and HC on MADRS and CGIS scores, sufficient distinction in neuropsychological test performance was found between the comparison groups. MDD participants were significantly worse (p < 0,0001) in subjective (PDQ5) as well as objective cognitive functioning (RAVLT subtests, DSST, TMTB scores). Significant differences between MDD and HC groups, established during objective cognitive testing, were specific to each age group, despite the general trend of deterioration of cognitive performance with age. ROC analysis was used to examine the utility of PDQ5, RAVLT, TMTB, and DSST tests to discriminate MDD patients from HC. AUCROCs showed that all cognitive measures included in this study adequately differentiated between the performance of HC and MDD patients. We also provided cutoff scores for five age groups in discriminating MDD patients from HC, based on the Se and Sp of the prescribed scores. The age ranges for each group were as follows: Group 1 – 18–24 years; Group 2 – 25–34 years; Group 3 – 35–44 years;
Group 4 – 45–54 years; Group 5 – 55–65 years. For PDQ5 cutoff scores were: in the whole sample > 3,5 points (Se 90%, Sp 91%); Group 1 > 3,5 points (Se 100%, Sp 83 %); Group 2 > 3,5 points (Se 93%, Sp 89%); Group 3 > 2,5 points (Se 89%, Sp 83%); Group 4 > 2,5 points (Se 100%, Sp 84%); Group 5 > 3,0 points (Se 90%, Sp 100%). For immediate recall of the RAVLT cutoff scores were: in the whole sample < 56,5 words (Se 85%, Sp 82%); Group 1 < 57 words (Se 100%, Sp 73%); Group 2 < 59,5 words (Se 85%, Sp 70%); Group 3 < 59,5 words (Se 91%, Sp 83%); Group 4 < 57,5 words (Se 86%, Sp 74%); Group 5 < 53,5 words (Se 94%, Sp 80%). For proactive interference of the RAVLT cutoff scores were: in the whole sample < 6,5 words (Se 66%, Sp 72%); Group 2 < 7,5 words (Se 83%, Sp 63%); Group 3 < 6,5 words (Se 70%, Sp 75%); Group 4 < 6,5 words (Se 72%, Sp 74%); an unsatisfactory quality of the models for groups 1 and 5 did not allow to determine the cutoff scores for these age groups. For retroactive interference of the RAVLT cutoff scores were: in the whole sample < 13,5 words (Se 86%, Sp 76%); Group 2 < 13,5 words (Se 85%, Sp 89%); Group 3 < 13,5 words (Se 82%, Sp 92%); Group 4 < 13.5 words (Se 82%, Sp 74%); Group 5 < 12,5 words (Se 94%, Sp 80%); Group 1 had an unsatisfactory quality of the model. For TMTB cutoff scores were: in the whole sample > 63 s (Se 70%, Sp 68%); Group 1 > 61 s (Se 91%, Sp 64%); Group 2 > 58,5 s (Se 73%, Sp 60%); Group 3 > 58,0 s (Se 83%, Sp 83%); Group 5 > 71,5 s (Se 90%, Sp 80%); Group 4 had an unsatisfactory quality of the model. For DSST cutoff scores were: in the whole sample < 58.5 points (Se 74%, Sp 63%); Group 2 < 59,5 points (Se 71%, Sp 67%); Group 3 < 60,5 points (Se 78%, Sp 83%); Group 4 < 53,5 points (Se 68%, Sp 72%); groups 1 and 5 had an unsatisfactory quality of the model. < 6,5 слів (Se 70%, Sp 75%).
Conclusions. Patients with an active episode of MDD demonstrate as subjective as objective cognitive impairments as compared to HC. Cognitive dysfunctioninthe Ukrainiancohortof MDDpatients is characterized by mild impairments in working memory; moderate impairments in alternating attention; and moderate impairments in executive functioning. PDQ5 and neuropsychological tests, such as RAVLT (subtests for immediate recall, proactive and retroactive interference), TMTB, and DSST show from excellent to good diagnostic value for separating patients with MDD from HC. PDQ5, RAVLT, TMTB, and DSST and obtained ageadjusted cutoffs of those tests could be used by clinicians in everyday practice as a method to secure a more valid assessment of cognitive function in MDD patients.
References
Smith K. Mental health: a world of depression. Nature. 2014 Nov 13; 515 (7526): 181.
Kessler R.C., Bromet E.J. The epidemiology of depression across cultures. Annu Rev Public Health. 2013; 34: 119–38.
Krol M, Koopmanschap M, Papenburg J, et al. Do productivity costs matter?: the impact of including productivity costs on the incremental costs of interventions targeted at depressive disorders. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Jul; 29 (7): 601–19.
McIntyre R.S., Soczynska J.Z., Woldeyohannes HO, et al. The impact of cognitive impairment on perceived workforce performance: results from the International Mood Disorders Collaborative Project. Compr Psychiatry. 2015 Jan; 56: 279–82.
Conradi H.J., Ormel J, de Jonge P. Presence of individual (residual) symptoms during depressive episodes and periods of remission: a 3year prospective study. Psychol Med. 2011 Jun; 41 (6): 1165–74.
Maruff P, Jaeger J. Understanding the importance of cognitive dysfunction and cognitive change in major depressive disorder. In: McIntyre R, editor. Cognitive impairment in major depressive disorder: Clinical relevance, biological substrates, and treatment opportunities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2016. P. 15–29.
Cambridge O.R., Knight M.J., Mills N, et al. The clinical relationship between cognitive impairment and psychosocial functioning in major depressive disorder: A systematic review. Psychiatry Res. 2018 Nov; 269: 157–71.
Jaeger J, Zaragoza S. The digit symbol substitution test (DSST): psychometric properties and clinical utility in major depressive disorder. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2016 Oct; 26 (2): S341.
Baune B.T., Air T. Clinical, Functional, and Biological Correlates of Cognitive Dimensions in Major Depressive Disorder – Rationale, Design, and Characteristics of the Cognitive Function and Mood Study (CoFaMStudy). Front Psychiatry. 2016 Aug 26; 7: 150.
Belgaied W, Samp J, Vimont A, et al. Routine clinical assessment of cognitive functioning in schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014 Jan; 24 (1): 133–41.
Lee R.S., Hermens D.F., Porter M.A., et al. A metaanalysis of cognitive deficits in first episode major depressive disorder. J Affect Disord. 2012; 140 (2): 113–24.
Snyder H.R. Major depressive disorder is associated with broad impairments on neuropsychological measures of executive function: a metaanalysis and review. Psychol Bull. 2013 Jan;139 (1): 81–132.
Rock P.L., Roiser J.P., Riedel W.J., et al. Cognitive impairment in depression: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Psychol Med. 2014 Jul; 44 (10): 2029–40.
Egeland J, Lund A, Landrø N.I., et al. Cortisol level predicts executive and memory function in depression, symptom level predicts psychomotor speed. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2005 Dec; 112 (6): 434–41.
Hammar A, Ardal G. Cognitive functioning in major depression – a summary. Front Hum Neurosci. 2009 Sep 25; 3:26.
Reppermund S, Ising M, Lucae S, et al. Cognitive impairment in unipolar depression is persistent and nonspecific: further evidence for the final common pathway disorder hypothesis. Psychol Med. 2009 Apr;39 (4): 603–14.
Shilyansky C, Williams L, Gyurak A, et al. Effect of antidepressant treatment on cognitive impairments associated with depression: a randomised longitudinal study. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016 May; 3 (5): 425–35.
Sumiyoshi T, Watanabe K, Noto S, et al. Relationship of cognitive impairment with depressive symptoms and psychosocial function in patients with major depressive disorder: crosssectional analysis of baseline data from PERFORMJ. J Affect Disord. 2019; 258: 172–78.
Wang G, Tan KHX, Ren H, et al. Impact of Cognitive Symptoms on HealthRelated Quality of Life and Work Productivity in Chinese Patients with Major Depressive Disorder: Results from the PROACT Study. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2020 Mar 13; 16: 749–759.
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Arlington: American Psychiatric Association; 2013. 947 p.
Levada O.A., Troyan A.S. Cognitive functional relationships in major depressive disorder: Crucial data from a Ukrainian openlabel study of vortioxetine versus escitalopram. J Affect Disord. 2019 May 1; 250: 114–122.
Montgomery S.A., Asberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979; 134: 382–9.
Guy W. Clinical Global Impressions. In: Guy W, editor. ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology Revised. Rockville: National Institute of Mental Health; 1976. P. 217–222.
Cha D. Perceived Deficits Questionnaire – Depression, 5item (PDQD5). In: McIntyre R, editor. Cognitive impairment in major depressive disorder: Clinical relevance, biological substrates, and treatment opportunities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2016. P. 242–56.
Strauss E, Sherman EMS, Spreen O. A compendium of neuropsychological tests: Administration, norms, and commentary. 3rd Edition. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2006. 1216 p.
Harrison J.E., Barry H, Baune B.T., et al. Stability, reliability, and validity of the THINC it screening tool for cognitive impairment in depression: A psychometric exploration in healthy volunteers. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2018 Sep; 27 (3): e1736.
Maj M, D'Elia L, Satz P, et al. Evaluation of two new neuropsychological tests designed to minimize cultural bias in the assessment of HIV 1 seropositive persons: a WHO study. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 1993 Mar;8 (2): 123–35.
Reitan R.M., Wolfson D. The Halstead– Reitan Neuropsycholgical Test Battery: Therapy and clinical interpretation. Tucson, AZ: Neuropsychological Press. 1985. 486 p.
Schmidt M. Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test: RAVLT: a Handbook. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services; 1996. 139 p.
Ahern E, Semkovska M. Cognitive functioning in the firstepisode of major depressive disorder: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Neuropsychology. 2017 Jan; 31 (1): 52–72.
McIntyre R.S., Florea I, Tonnoir B, et al. Efficacy of vortioxetine on cognitive functioning in working patients with major depressive disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2017 Jan;78 (1): 115–21.
Cabanel N, Schmidt AM, Fockenberg S, et al. Evening preference and poor sleep independently affect attentionalexecutive functions in patients with depression. Psychiatry Res. 2019 Nov; 281:112533.
Klojčnik M, Kavcic V, Bakracevic Vukman K. Relationship of Depression With Executive Functions and Visuospatial Memory in Elderly. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2017 Dec; 85 (4): 490–503.
RajtarZembaty A, RajtarZembaty J, Olszewska K, et al. Comparison of cognitive functioning of elders with latelife depression and patients with and without a history of depressive episodes: a crosssectional study. Psychol Health Med. 2020 Dec 22: 1–7.
Kiely K.M., Butterworth P, Watson N, et al. The Symbol Digit Modalities Test: Normative data from a large nationally representative sample of Australians. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2014; 29 (8): 767–775.
McIntyre R.S., Lophaven S, Olsen C.K. A randomized, doubleblind, placebocontrolled study of vortioxetine on cognitive function in depressed adults. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2014 Oct; 17 (10): 1557–67.
Mahableshwarkar A.R., Zajecka J, Jacobson W, et al. A randomized, placebo controlled, activereference, doubleblind, flexibledose study of the efficacy of vortioxetine on cognitive function in major depressive disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2015 Jul; 40 (8): 2025–37.
