People with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have significantly higher rates of subclinical and overt epileptiform activity. In animal models, oligomeric Aβ amyloid is able to induce neuronal hyperexcitability even in the early phases of the disease. Such aberrant activity subsequently leads to downstream accumulation of toxic proteins, and ultimately to further neurodegeneration and neuronal silencing mediated by concomitant tau accumulation. Several neurotransmitters participate in the initial hyperexcitable state, with increased synaptic glutamatergic tone and decreased GABAergic inhibition. These changes appear to activate excitotoxic pathways and, ultimately, cause reduced long-term potentiation, increased long-term depression, and increased GABAergic inhibitory remodelling at the network level. Brain hyperexcitability has therefore been identified as a potential target for therapeutic interventions aimed at enhancing cognition, and, possibly, disease modification in the longer term. Clinical trials are ongoing to evaluate the potential efficacy in targeting hyperexcitability in AD, with levetiracetam showing some encouraging effects. Newer compounds and techniques, such as gene editing via viral vectors or brain stimulation, also show promise. Diagnostic challenges include identifying best biomarkers for measuring sub-clinical epileptiform discharges. Determining the timing of any intervention is critical and future trials will need to carefully stratify participants with respect to the phase of disease pathology.

INTRODUCTION: A major limitation in Alzheimer's disease (AD) research is the lack of the ability to measure cognitive performance at scale—robustly, remotely, and frequently. Currently, there are no established online digital platforms validated against plasma biomarkers of AD.METHODS: We used a novel web‐based platform that assessed different cognitive functions in AD patients (N = 46) and elderly controls (N = 53) who were also evaluated for plasma biomarkers (amyloid beta 42/40 ratio, phosphorylated tau ([p‐tau]181, glial fibrillary acidic protein, neurofilament light chain). Their cognitive performance was compared to a second, larger group of elderly controls (N = 352).RESULTS: Patients with AD were significantly impaired across all digital cognitive tests, with performance correlating with plasma biomarker levels, particularly p‐tau181. The combination of p‐tau181 and the single best‐performing digital test achieved high accuracy in group classification.DISCUSSION: These findings show how online testing can now be deployed in patients with AD to measure cognitive function effectively and related to blood biomarkers of the disease.Highlights: This is the first study comparing online digital testing to plasma biomarkers. Alzheimer's disease patients and two independent cohorts of elderly controls were assessed. Cognitive performance correlated with plasma biomarkers, particularly phosphorylated tau (p‐tau)181. Glial fibrillary acidic protein and neurofilament light chain, and less so the amyloid beta 42/40 ratio, were also associated with performance. The best cognitive metric performed at par to p‐tau181 in group classification.

We assessed changes in functional connectivity by fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) and cognitive measures in otherwise neurologically asymptomatic people with HIV (PWH) switching combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). In a prospective study (baseline and follow-up after at least 4 months), virologically suppressed PWH switched non-nuclease reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI; tenofovir-DF/emtricitabine with efavirenz to rilpivirine) and integrase-strand-transfer inhibitors (INSTI; tenofovir-DF/emtricitabine with raltegravir to dolutegravir). PWH were assessed by resting-state fMRI and stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) task fMRI as well as with a cognitive battery (CogState™) at baseline and follow-up. Switching from efavirenz to rilpivirine (n = 10) was associated with increased functional connectivity in the dorsal attention network (DAN) and a reduction in SSRTs (p = 0.025) that positively correlated with the time previously on efavirenz (mean = 4.8 years, p = 0.02). Switching from raltegravir to dolutegravir (n = 12) was associated with increased connectivity in the left DAN and bilateral sensory-motor and associative visual networks. In the NNRTI study, significant improvements in the cognitive domains of executive function, working memory and speed of visual processing were observed, whereas no significant changes in cognitive function were observed in the INSTI study. Changes in fMRI are evident in PWH without perceived neuropsychiatric complaints switching cART. fMRI may be a useful tool in assisting to elucidate the underlying pathogenic mechanisms of cART-related neuropsychiatric effects.

Objective: To assess whether the antiseizure medication levetiracetam may improve cognition in individuals with Alzheimer's disease who have not previously experienced a seizure.Methods: We performed a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled crossover pilot study in individuals with mild‐to‐moderate Alzheimer's disease. Electroencephalography was performed at baseline and those with active epileptiform discharges were excluded. Eligible participants were randomized to placebo for 12 weeks or an active arm of oral levetiracetam (4 weeks up‐titration to levetiracetam 500 mg twice daily, 4 weeks maintained on this dose followed by 4 weeks down‐titration to nil). Participants then crossed over to the other arm. The primary outcome was change in cognitive function assessed by the Oxford Memory Task, a task sensitive to hippocampal memory binding. Secondary outcomes included tolerability, other neuropsychological scales, and general questionnaires.Results: Recruitment numbers were severely limited owing to restrictions from the COVID‐19 pandemic at the time of the study. Eight participants completed both arms of the study (mean age 68.4 years [SD = 9.2]; 5 females [62.5%]). No participants withdrew from the study and there was no significant difference between reported side effects in the active levetiracetam or placebo arm. Measures of mood and quality of life were also not significantly different between the two arms based on participant or carer reports. In limited data analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between participants in the active levetiracetam and placebo arm on the memory task.Significance: This pilot study demonstrates that levetiracetam was well tolerated in individuals with Alzheimer's disease who do not have a history of seizures and has no detrimental effect on mood or quality of life. Larger studies are needed to assess whether levetiracetam may have a positive effect on cognitive function in subsets of individuals with Alzheimer's disease.Plain Language Summary: Abnormal electrical activity within the brain, such as is seen in seizures, might contribute to memory problems in people with dementia. We completed a clinical trial to see if an antiseizure medication, levetiracetam, could help with memory difficulties in people with Alzheimer's disease (the most common cause of dementia). In this pilot study, we could not prove whether levetiracetam helped memory function. We did show that the drug is safe and well tolerated in people with dementia who have not had a seizure. This work, therefore, offers a platform for future research exploring antiseizure medications in people with dementia.

Digital cognitive testing using online platforms has emerged as a potentially transformative tool in clinical neuroscience. In theory, it could provide a powerful means of screening for and tracking cognitive performance in people at risk of developing conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease. Here we investigate whether digital metrics derived from an in-person administered, tablet-based short-term memory task—the ‘What was where?’ Oxford Memory Task—were able to clinically stratify patients at different points within the Alzheimer’s disease continuum and to track disease progression over time. Performance of these metrics compared to traditional neuropsychological pen-and-paper screening tests of cognition was also analysed. A total of 325 people participated in this study: 49 patients with subjective cognitive decline, 57 with mild cognitive impairment, 63 with Alzheimer’s disease dementia and 156 elderly healthy controls. Most digital metrics were able to discriminate between healthy controls and patients with mild cognitive impairment and between mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease patients. Some, including Absolute Localization Error, also differed significantly between patients with subjective cognitive decline and mild cognitive impairment. Identification accuracy was the best predictor of hippocampal atrophy, performing as well as standard screening neuropsychological tests. A linear support vector model combining digital metrics achieved high accuracy and performed at par with standard testing in discriminating between elderly healthy controls and subjective cognitive decline (area under the curve 0.82) and between subjective cognitive decline and mild cognitive impairment (area under the curve 0.92), while performing worse in classifying between mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease patients (area under the curve 0.75). Memory imprecision was able to predict cognitive decline on standard cognitive tests over one year. Overall, these findings show how it might be possible to use a digital memory test in clinics and clinical trial contexts to stratify and track performance across the Alzheimer’s disease continuum.

Apathy is a prevalent and persistent neuropsychiatric syndrome across many neurological disorders, significantly impacting both patients and caregivers. We systematically quantified discrepancies between self- and caregiver-reported apathy in 335 patients with a variety of diagnoses, such as frontotemporal dementia (behavioural variant and semantic dementia subtypes), Parkinson’s disease, Parkinson’s disease dementia, dementia with Lewy bodies, Alzheimer’s disease dementia, mild cognitive impairment, small vessel cerebrovascular disease, subjective cognitive decline and autoimmune encephalitis. Using the Apathy Motivation Index (AMI) and its analogous caregiver version (AMI-CG), we found that caregiver-reported apathy consistently exceeded self-reported levels across all conditions. Moreover, self-reported apathy accounted for only 14.1% of the variance in caregiver ratings. This apathy reporting discrepancy was most pronounced in conditions associated with impaired insight, such as behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, and was significantly correlated with cognitive impairment. Deficits in memory and fluency explained an additional 11.2% of the variance in caregiver-reported apathy. Specifically, executive function deficits (e.g. indexed by fluency) and memory impairments may contribute to behavioural inertia or recall of it. These findings highlight the need to integrate patient and caregiver perspectives in apathy assessments, especially for conditions with prominent cognitive impairment. To improve diagnostic accuracy and deepen our understanding of apathy across neurological disorders, we highlight the need for adapted apathy assessment strategies that account for cognitive impairment particularly in individuals with insight or memory deficits. Understanding the cognitive mechanisms underpinning discordant apathy reporting in dementia might help inform targeted clinical interventions and reduce caregiver burden.