Nice catch by my colleague Andrew Holtz (one of our story reviewers on HealthNewsReview.org) as he combed the literature and settled on a paper in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease entitled, “Dementia Specialists and Early Adoption of Amyloid Imaging.” With Andrew’s permission, I am reposting his piece in its entirety.
—————————————————
A new survey of dementia specialists caught my eye for two reasons.
One, most said they intend to use a newly-approved $3000 test for amyloid deposits in the brain, even though they concede the results can be misleading (for instance, while a lack of amyloid found on this test means a person probably doesn’t have Alzheimer’s, many people have the deposits, but not Alzheimer’s, so the meaning of a positive result is unclear).
Two, half of them “felt media coverage of testing would in?uence whether amyloid imaging became commonly used in clinical practice.” But not a single respondent (0 of 135) “felt their decision to use amyloid imaging would be in?uenced by media coverage.”
Let’s take that second point first. It’s very human. Most people believe they are above-average drivers, when that simply can’t be true. It’s also consistent with other studies of physician attitudes and behavior. Studies consistently link conflicts of interest with differences in how physicians give advice, reach conclusions, and practice… but they tend to say such conflicts don’t affect them. (Browse the work of Lisa Bero and colleagues.)
There’s also a lesson here for journalists. We have to be careful about how we report on tests and treatments, because our stories likely influence even professionals who should know better.
And that brings me back to the first point… that dementia specialists intend to use this test, if they can find someone to foot the bill. (The study authors calculate that screening just a quarter of Americans 75 and older would cost $16 billion a year.) The survey report said most of the specialists who intend to use the test say it would help make them more confident about their diagnosis. That’s nice, but what will it do for patients and families.
Does being more confident about an Alzheimer’s diagnosis change treatment? Probably not. To begin with, there isn’t any treatment that can change the course of the disease. The available drugs can help some people function a bit better for a period of time, but the effects are individual. The official diagnosis isn’t the final word. That means trying a drug to see how it works in an individual patient… for good or ill (and there can be serious side effects, including disabling falls caused by balance problems).
Someday there may be effective treatments for Alzheimer’s disease. But until then, I’m wary of diverting money to testing, mostly so that doctors can check off a box with more confidence.
—————————-
Addendum on January 31, 2013: See MedPage Today story, “Medicare Panel Pans Alzheimer’s Test.”
—————————-
Follow us on Facebook, and on Twitter:
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Charles Hodges MD
January 21, 2013 at 9:45 amThe connection for all of this may be that the test that has been approved to identify “early” alzheimers is also made by a company that is trying to gain approval for a drug that “may” work in “early” alzheimers but seems 2b worthless for moderate or advanced. The key is to identify a population to which a marginally effective drug could be marketed. Just sayin…Follow the money.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like