The analysis of oxidative stress markers may increase the accuracy of the differential diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease with and without depression

5Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of work is to assess the usefulness of oxidative stress parameters in the differential diagnosis of dementia of the Alzheimer’s type and dementia of the Alzheimer’s type with coexisting depression. Methods: The study involved three groups of people: patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) (AD; N=27), patients with Alzheimer’s disease and depression (D) (AD+D; N=30), and a control group that consisted of people without dementia and without depression (C; N=24). The assessment of cognitive functioning was carried out using among alia, Auditory Verbal Learning Test and Verbal Fluency Test. Furthermore, we determined the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD-1) and superoxide anion radical. Results: Multiple models with different combinations of independent variables showed that SOD together with Rey delayed recall were the best significant predictors of AD with the area under curve (AUC) of 0.893 (p = 0.001) and superoxide anion radical (O2•−) together with verbal fluency – sharp objects were the best significant predictors of AD +D diagnosis with the AUC of 0.689 (p = 0.034). Conclusion: This study confirmed the value of neuropsychological diagnosis and analysis of oxidative stress markers in the diagnosis of AD and major depressive disorder (MDD) in the course of AD. The combination of the use of biochemical markers and neuropsycholo-gical tests seems particularly important for differential diagnosis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Polak-Szabela, A., Dziembowska, I., Bracha, M., Pedrycz-Wieczorska, A., Kedziora-Kornatowska, K., & Kozakiewicz, M. (2021). The analysis of oxidative stress markers may increase the accuracy of the differential diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease with and without depression. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 16, 1105–1117. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S310750

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free