Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: Dementia subtypes, including Alzheimer’s dementia (AD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and frontotemporal dementia (FTD), pose diagnostic challenges. This review examines the effectiveness of 18 F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography ( 18 F-FDG PET) in differentiating these subtypes for precise treatment and management. Methods: A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was conducted using databases like PubMed and Embase to identify studies on the diagnostic utility of 18 F-FDG PET in dementia. The search included studies up to November 16, 2022, focusing on peer-reviewed journals and applying the goldstandard clinical diagnosis for dementia subtypes. Results: From 12,815 articles, 14 were selected for final analysis. For AD versus FTD, the sensitivity was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88–0.98) and specificity was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.70–0.92). In the case of AD versus DLB, 18F-FDG PET showed a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI 0.88-0.98) and specificity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.70–0.92). Lastly, when differentiating AD from non-AD dementias, the sensitivity was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80–0.91) and the specificity was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.80–0.91). The studies mostly used case-control designs with visual and quantitative assessments. Conclusions 18 F-FDG PET exhibits high sensitivity and specificity in differentiating dementia subtypes, particularly AD, FTD, and DLB. This method, while not a standalone diagnostic tool, significantly enhances diagnostic accuracy in uncertain cases, complementing clinical assessments and structural imaging.

no abstract available.

Recently, aducanumab, a beta amyloid targeted immunotherapy, has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of Alzheimer’s dementia (AD). Although many questions need to be answered, this approval provides a promising hope for the development of AD drugs that could be supported by new biomarkers such as blood-based ones and composite neuropsychological tests that can confirm pathologic changes in early stages of AD. It is important to elucidate the complexity of AD which is known to be associated with other factors such as vascular etiologies and neuro-inflammation. Through the second international conference of the Korean Dementia Association (KDA), researchers from all over the world have participated in the exchange of opinions with KDA members on the most up-to-date topics. The Academic Committee of the KDA summarizes lectures to provide the depth of the conference as well as discussions. This will be an important milestone to widen the latest knowledge in the research of AD’s diagnosis, therapeutics, pathogenesis that can lead to the establishment of future directions.

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between subjective sleep quality and cognitive function in patients with subjective memory impairment (SMI), a self-perceived cognitive decline without objective cognitive impairment, and amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). Methods: We enrolled 246 patients with memory impairment (126 with SMI and 120 with aMCI) who fulfilled the Korean version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI-K), a standardized battery of neuropsychological tests, and mood questionnaires. Based on the PSQI-K cutoff point of 5, patients were classified as good sleepers (GS) or poor sleepers (PS). Results: There was no difference in the proportion of GS and PS between patients with SMI and aMCI [68 PS (54.0%) in SMI vs. 62 PS (51.7%) in aMCI, p>0.05]. Demographics did not differ between the SMI and aMCI groups. In both the SMI and aMCI groups, PS had worse sleep-wake parameters, such as sleep latency, total sleep time, and sleep efficiency, than GS and reported worse performance in all PSQI-K subcomponents. Neuropsychological data were not different between GS and PS, except for the Stroop word test in patients with aMCI. Depressive scores were worse in PS than in GS in both the SMI and aMCI groups. Conclusions We observed that cognitive function was not significantly different between GS and PS in both the SMI and aMCI groups, except in the Stroop word test in the aMCI group, while PS had more depressive mood than GS in both groups. This suggests that subjective sleep quality may depend on mood disturbances in patients with mild cognitive impairment.

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between subjective sleep quality and cognitive function in patients with subjective memory impairment (SMI), a self-perceived cognitive decline without objective cognitive impairment, and amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). Methods: We enrolled 246 patients with memory impairment (126 with SMI and 120 with aMCI) who fulfilled the Korean version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI-K), a standardized battery of neuropsychological tests, and mood questionnaires. Based on the PSQI-K cutoff point of 5, patients were classified as good sleepers (GS) or poor sleepers (PS). Results: There was no difference in the proportion of GS and PS between patients with SMI and aMCI [68 PS (54.0%) in SMI vs. 62 PS (51.7%) in aMCI, p>0.05]. Demographics did not differ between the SMI and aMCI groups. In both the SMI and aMCI groups, PS had worse sleep-wake parameters, such as sleep latency, total sleep time, and sleep efficiency, than GS and reported worse performance in all PSQI-K subcomponents. Neuropsychological data were not different between GS and PS, except for the Stroop word test in patients with aMCI. Depressive scores were worse in PS than in GS in both the SMI and aMCI groups. Conclusions We observed that cognitive function was not significantly different between GS and PS in both the SMI and aMCI groups, except in the Stroop word test in the aMCI group, while PS had more depressive mood than GS in both groups. This suggests that subjective sleep quality may depend on mood disturbances in patients with mild cognitive impairment.

Background: Computerized versions of cognitive screening test could have advantages over pencil-and-paper versions by eliminating rater-dependent factors and saving the time required to score the tests and report the results. We developed a computerized cognitive screening test (Inbrain Cognitive Screening Test [Inbrain CST]) that takes about 30 minutes to administer on a touchscreen computer and is composed of neuropsychological tests already shown to be sensitive in detecting early cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The aims of this study were to 1) introduce normative data for Inbrain CST, 2) verify its reliability and validity, 3) assess clinical usefulness, and 4) identify neuroanatomical correlates of Inbrain CST. Methods: The Inbrain CST runs on the Microsoft Windows 10 operating system and comprises 7 subtests that encompass 5 cognitive domains: attention, language, visuospatial, memory, and executive functions. First, we recruited 480 cognitively normal elderly people (age 50–90) from communities nationwide to establish normative data for Inbrain CST.Second, we enrolled 97 patients from our dementia clinic (26 with subjective cognitive decline [SCD], 42 with amnestic mild cognitive impairment [aMCI], and 29 with dementia due to AD) and investigated sensitivity and specificity of Inbrain CST for discriminating cognitively impaired patients from those with SCD using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. Third, we compared the Inbrain CST scores with those from another neuropsychological test battery to obtain concurrent validity and assessed test–retest reliability. Finally, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based cortical thickness analyses were performed to provide anatomical substrates for performances on the Inbrain CST. Results: First, in the normative sample, the total score on the Inbrain CST was significantly affected by age, years of education, and gender. Second, Inbrain CST scores among the three patient groups decreased in the order of SCD, aMCI, and AD dementia, and the ROC curve analysis revealed that Inbrain CST had good discriminative power for differentiating cognitively impaired patients from those with SCD. Third, the Inbrain CST subtests had high concurrent validity and test–retest reliability. Finally, in the cortical thickness analysis, each cognitive domain score and the total score of Inbrain CST showed distinct patterns of anatomical correlates that fit into the previously known brain–behavior relationship. Conclusion Inbrain CST had good validity, reliability, and clinical usefulness in detecting cognitive impairment in the elderly. Furthermore, it showed neuroanatomical validity through MRI cortical thinning patterns. These results suggest that Inbrain CST is a useful cognitive screening tool with efficiency and validity to detect mild impairments in cognition in clinical settings.