Refining the ECT-Dementia Trial Protocol in Response to Recruitment Challenges
Valeriya Tsygankova,Maria Lapid,Brent Forester,Georgios Petrides,Martina Mueller,Louis Nykamp,Sohag Sanghani,Jonathan Kim,Adriana P. Hermida
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2024.01.179
2024-04-01
Abstract:Introduction The Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) for Agitation in Dementia (ECT-AD) trial is a multi-site, NIH-funded, study investigating the safety and effect of ECT in severe treatment refractory agitation in dementia. Agitation is present in up to 90% of individuals with dementia, increasing morbidity and mortality and contributing to caregiver stress and burden. Behavioral interventions and off-label use of psychotropics have limited efficacy and higher risk for adverse effects. The only U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved treatment for agitation associated with dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) is brexpipraxole. However, there is preliminary evidence that acute ECT can be safe and effective in reducing agitation in this population. The original design of the ECT-AD study was a single-blind, randomized controlled trial where participants with Alzheimer's dementia and agitation were randomized 1:1 to ECT+usual care (UC) or Simulated-ECT+UC. Due to major challenges to recruitment, we made changes to the study criteria, including expansion to other types of dementia and modification of agitation criteria. The study was redesigned as a single arm, non-randomized trial aiming to determine (1) the effect of up to 9 ECT+UC on severe agitation in up to 50 participants with moderate to severe dementia; and (2) the tolerability/safety of ECT+UC. Methods Current inclusion criteria include diagnosis of Alzheimer's, Vascular, Frontotemporal, and Dementia with Lewy Bodies; age 40 or older; MMSE ≤ 15; Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory Nursing Home Version (CMAI) score of ≥ 5 on at least one item or score of 4 on two items of aggression or physical nonaggression that holds potentially dangerous consequences or one score of ≥5 in items of verbal aggression; at least 3 failed adequate pharmacological interventions from different drug classes; English speaker and with informed consent by a legal representative (LAR). Acute course of ECT consists of up to 9 sessions, administered 3 times/week or less. The primary efficacy outcome is CMAI total score, assessed at baseline and after 3rd, 6th, and 9th ECT. Secondary efficacy outcomes include Alzheimer's disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change Scale (ADCS-CGIC), Neuropsychiatric Inventory, Clinician Version (NPI-C), and Pittsburgh Agitation Scale (PAS). Tolerability is assessed with Severe Impairment Battery-8 (SIB-8), and safety is assessed with Confusion Assessment Method (CAM). There is a 12-month naturalistic observational phase with evaluations at months 1, 3, 6, and 12. Results As of 9/12/23, 7,581 patients were pre-screened across 5 sites (Emory University, Zucker Hillside Hospital, Mayo Clinic, Pine Rest Christian Mental Health Center, and McLean Hospital) since 2020. Of them, 1,129 (14.9%) had the diagnosis of dementia; 274 (24.3%) with probable Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and 855 (75.7%) with non-AD dementia. 21 (26.9%) patients out of 78 approached LAR/families were consented. Out of 21, 2 (9.5%) patients were determined to be ineligible at baseline. Out of 19 (90.5%) enrolled participants, 13 (68.4%) were randomized under the original protocol and 6 (31.6%) were enrolled in ECT+UC under the current protocol (since July 2023).Besides the COVID-19-related delays (e.g., reduced bed counts, establishing appropriate safety procedures for patients and staff, etc.), notable challenges related to study recruitment under the original protocol (single-blind, randomized controlled trial) included: (1) family/caregiver and clinician reticence to referring acutely agitated patients to a research trial and potentially being randomized to simulated ECT (2) unexpectedly high rate of patients with non-AD dementia diagnoses in recruitment pool, (3) patients not being agitated enough per CMAI criteria (score of ≥5 on at least one item of aggression or a physical nonaggressive item), and (4) patients not meeting the age criteria (55 to 89 years old).Notable challenges that remain under the new protocol include: (1) patients not meeting the criteria based on psychiatric comorbidities, medical reasons precluding ECT or ECT within the last 3 months, clinician not wanting ECT, not enough failed medication trials, not cognitively impaired enough, or no LAR, (2) LAR/families are: research hesitant, ECT hesitant, concerned over the length of hospital stay, or interested in another study, and (3) patients get better on medication. Conclusions Unanticipated challenges led to changes in study design and protocol. The impact of these changes on recruitment and implications for further study of ECT for this population of individuals with advanced dementia and agitation/aggression will be discussed.
psychiatry,geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology