Individuals with Down syndrome have an enhanced risk of developing early onset Alzheimer disease. Here, the authors describe the features of Alzheimer disease in Down syndrome and show how understanding the genetic and pathogenic mechanisms of this form of Alzheimer disease may shed light on more general mechanisms of neurodegeneration. Down syndrome, which arises in individuals carrying an extra copy of chromosome 21, is associated with a greatly increased risk of early-onset Alzheimer disease. It is thought that this risk is conferred by the presence of three copies of the gene encoding amyloid precursor protein (APP) — an Alzheimer disease risk factor — although the possession of extra copies of other chromosome 21 genes may also play a part. Further study of the mechanisms underlying the development of Alzheimer disease in people with Down syndrome could provide insights into the mechanisms that cause dementia in the general population.
Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRDs) are a global crisis facing the aging population and society as a whole. With the numbers of people with ADRDs predicted to rise dramatically across the world, the scientific community can no longer neglect the need for research focusing on ADRDs among underrepresented ethnoracial diverse groups. The Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART; alz.org/ISTAART ) comprises a number of professional interest areas (PIAs), each focusing on a major scientific area associated with ADRDs. We leverage the expertise of the existing international cadre of ISTAART scientists and experts to synthesize a cross‐PIA white paper that provides both a concise “state‐of‐the‐science” report of ethnoracial factors across PIA foci and updated recommendations to address immediate needs to advance ADRD science across ethnoracial populations.
Objectives To describe the incidence of recorded mental illness and challenging behaviour in people with intellectual disability in UK primary care and to explore the prescription of psychotropic drugs in this group. Design Cohort study. Setting 571 general practices contributing data to The Health Improvement Network clinical database. Participants 33 016 adults (58% male) with intellectual disability who contributed 211 793 person years’ data. Main outcome measures Existing and new records of mental illness, challenging behaviour, and psychotropic drug prescription. Results 21% (7065) of the cohort had a record of mental illness at study entry, 25% (8300) had a record of challenging behaviour, and 49% (16 242) had a record of prescription of psychotropic drugs. During follow-up, the rate of new cases of mental illness in people without a history at cohort entry was 262 (95% confidence interval 254 to 271) per 10 000 person years and the rate of challenging behaviour was 239 (231 to 247) per 10 000 person years. The rate of new psychotropic drug prescription in those without a previous history of psychotropic drug treatment was 518 (503 to 533) per 10 000 person years. Rates of new recording of severe mental illness declined by 5% (95% confidence interval 3% to 7%) per year (P<0.001), and new prescriptions of antipsychotics declined by 4% (3% to 5%) per year P<0.001) between 1999 and 2013. New prescriptions of mood stabilisers also decreased significantly. The rate of new antipsychotic prescribing was significantly higher in people with challenging behaviour (incidence rate ratio 2.08, 95% confidence interval 1.90 to 2.27; P<0.001), autism (1.79, 1.56 to 2.04; P<0.001), and dementia (1.42, 1.12 to 1.81; P<0.003) and in those of older age, after control for other sociodemographic factors and comorbidity. Conclusions The proportion of people with intellectual disability who have been treated with psychotropic drugs far exceeds the proportion with recorded mental illness. Antipsychotics are often prescribed to people without recorded severe mental illness but who have a record of challenging behaviour. The findings suggest that changes are needed in the prescribing of psychotropics for people with intellectual disability. More evidence is needed of the efficacy and safety of psychotropic drugs in this group, particularly when they are used for challenging behaviour.
Background People with intellectual disability have a higher prevalence of physical health problems but often experience disparities in accessing health care. In England, a number of legislative changes, policies and recommendations have been introduced to improve health care access for this population. The aim of this qualitative study was to examine the extent to which patients with intellectual disability and their carers experience discrimination or other barriers in accessing health services, and whether health care experiences have improved over the last decade years. Method and Main Findings Twenty nine participants (14 patient and carer dyads, and one carer) took part in semi-structured interviews. The interviews were audio-taped and transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Eight themes were identified. Half the participants thought that the patient had been treated unfairly or had been discriminated against by health services. There were accounts of negative staff attitudes and behaviour, and failure of services to make reasonable adjustments. Other barriers included problems with communication, and accessing services because of lack of knowledge of local services and service eligibility issues; lack of support and involvement of carers; and language problems in participants from minority ethnic groups. Most participants were able to report at least one example of good practice in health care provision. Suggestions for improving services are presented. Conclusion Despite some improvements to services as a result of health policies and recommendations, more progress is required to ensure that health services make reasonable adjustments to reduce both direct and indirect discrimination of people with intellectual disability.
1 November 2012 in Research in Developmental Disabilities