SPECIAL ARTICLE

Current Concepts in Mild Cognitive Impairment

Ronald C. Petersen, PhD, MD; Rachelle Doody, MD, PhD; Alexander Kurz, MD; Richard C. Mohs, PhD;
John C. Morris, MD; Peter V. Rabins, MD; Karen Ritchie, MPsych, PhD; Martin Rossor, MA, MDFRCP;
Leon Thal, MD; Bengt Winblad, MD

he field of aging and dementia is focusing on the characterization of the earliest stages
of cognitive impairment. Recent research has identified a transitional state between
the cognitive changes of normal aging and Alzheimers disease (AD), known as mild
cognitive impairment (MCI). Mild cognitive impairment refers to the clinical condition between normal aging and AD in which persons experience memory loss to a greater extent
than one would expect for age, yet they do not meet currently accepted criteria for clinically probable AD. When these persons are observed longitudinally, they progress to clinically probable AD
at a considerably accelerated rate compared with healthy age-matched individuals. Consequently,
this condition has been recognized as suitable for possible therapeutic intervention, and several
multicenter international treatment trials are under way. Because this is a topic of intense interest,
a group of experts on aging and MCI from around the world in the fields of neurology, psychiatry,
geriatrics, neuropsychology, neuroimaging, neuropathology, clinical trials, and ethics was convened to summarize the current state of the field of MCI. Participants reviewed the world scientific literature on aging and MCI and summarized the various topics with respect to available evidence on MCI. Diagnostic criteria and clinical outcomes of these subjects are available in the literature.
Mild cognitive impairment is believed to be a high-risk condition for the development of clinically
probable AD. Heterogeneity in the use of the term was recognized, and subclassifications were suggested. While no treatments are recommended for MCI currently, clinical trials regarding potential therapies are under way. Recommendations concerning ethical issues in the diagnosis and the
management of subjects with MCI were made.
Arch Neurol. 2001;58:1985-1992
The boundary between normal aging and
early or mild Alzheimers disease (AD) is
an area of intense interest for theoretical
and practical reasons. Basic research, such
as the identification of secretase inhibitors and the development of an immunization model for the prevention of
amyloid deposition, underscores the importance of developing techniques for
early detection. 1,2 Parallel with these

From the Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, Minn

(Dr Petersen); Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex
(Dr Doody); Department of Psychiatry, Technische University, Munich, Germany
(Dr Kurz); Department of Psychiatry, Mt Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY
(Dr Mohs); Department of Neurology, Washington University School of Medicine,
St Louis, Mo (Dr Morris); Department of Psychiatry, The Johns Hopkins University
School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md (Dr Rabins); Department of Nervous System
Pathologies, French National Institute of Medical Research, Montpellier, France
(Dr Ritchie); Dementia Research Group, National Hospital for Neurology and
Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, England (Dr Rossor); Department
of Neurosciences, University of California, San Diego (Dr Thal); and Division
of Geriatrics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden (Dr Winblad).

(REPRINTED) ARCH NEUROL / VOL 58, DEC 2001

1985

endeavors, clinical research aimed at identifying the earliest signs of cognitive impairment has progressed.3-5
A slight impairment in cognitive function, typically memory, with otherwise
normal performance has been designated
mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and has become a topic of considerable research.3,4,6
From June 24 through 26, 1999, investigators from around the world gathered in
Chicago, Ill, at the Current Concepts in Mild
Cognitive Impairment conference to review the worlds literature regarding the
concept of MCI and to suggest directions
for future research.
MILD COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
Mild cognitive impairment refers to a transitional state between the cognition of normal aging and mild dementia.7 As shown
in Figure 1, the criteria for definitive AD,

WWW.ARCHNEUROL.COM

2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Downloaded From: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/ by a Griffith University User on 04/18/2016

100

Mild Cognitive Impairment

Function

Stable, %

Probable AD

Mild
Cognitive
Impairment

80

60

40

20
Definite AD
0

Age

Figure 1. Theoretical progression of a person developing Alzheimers

disease (AD). The inflection point in the curve indicates the onset of mild
cognitive impairment before the development of clinically probable AD.
Reprinted with permission from W.B. Saunders.

while still controversial, have been reasonably well established on a neuropathological basis.8 Similarly, in recent years, the criteria for clinically probable AD have
also been well characterized,9 and the correlation between clinical and pathological findings in suspected cases
of AD has been good.10 However, as Figure 1 depicts, most,
if not all, patients with AD experience a subtle cognitive
decline before reaching the clinical threshold for the diagnosis of clinically probable AD. This transitional period has become known as MCI and is now the subject
of several multicenter treatment trials involving more than
4000 subjects. The current clinical trials use an adaptation of the MCI criteria shown in the Table.
Because other presentations of MCI exist, the type
just described has been termed amnestic MCI because its
definition emphasizes memory loss. Most of these subjects will progress to AD at a rate of 10% to 15% per year,
compared with healthy control subjects who convert at
a rate of 1% to 2% per year.3,4 Data from the Mayo Alzheimers Disease Research Center, Rochester, Minn, which
has been observing a group of these subjects for more
than 10 years, have demonstrated a conversion to AD of
up to 80% during approximately 6 years (Figure 2).
Other definitions of MCI and the imaging and neuropathological features of these subjects are discussed in
subsequent sections.
RATING SCALES
There are several useful rating scales available for characterizing subjects along a continuum from normal aging through various stages of dementia.11,12 Although these
scales are useful for describing subjects at various levels
of involvement, they do not necessarily coincide with the
(REPRINTED) ARCH NEUROL / VOL 58, DEC 2001
1986

Figure 2. Survival curve of persons characterized as having a mild cognitive

impairment for 6 years. Approximately 80% have converted to dementia
during this time. Reprinted with permission from John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mild Cognitive Impairment

CDR and GDS

Criteria for Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment

Memory complaint, preferably corroborated by an informant
Impaired memory function for age and education
Preserved general cognitive function
Intact activities of daily living
Not demented

Duration, y

Normal

MCI

AD

0.5

CDR

GDS

Figure 3. Comparison of the clinical diagnoses of normal aging, mild

cognitive impairment (MCI), and Alzheimers disease (AD), compared with
the approximate stages on the rating scales, Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR)
and Global Deterioration Scale (GDS). Adapted from the American Medical
Association.13

clinically relevant conditions of normal aging, MCI, and

mild AD. For example, the Clinical Dementia Rating
(CDR) is a popular scale used to classify subjects along
a continuum from normal aging through AD.11 This scale
describes a continuum from normal (CDR 0) through
questionable dementia (CDR 0.5) to mild (CDR 1), moderate (CDR 2), and severe (CDR 3) dementia. Although
some investigators believe that CDR 0.5 is equivalent to
MCI, others contend that CDR 0.5 actually describes a
broader population that includes subjects with MCI and
mild AD.13 Another instrument, the Global Deterioration Scale (GDS) stages subjects from GDS 1 (normal)
to GDS 2 (normal with subjective memory impairment), GDS 3 (mild dementia), and GDS 4 through 7
(more severe stages of dementia).12 Within this rating
scale, subjects with MCI could correspond to a GDS of
either 2 or 3. These potential relationships are depicted
in Figure 3. The amnestic form of MCI is an identifiable entity that does not necessarily map to a specific stage
on these rating scales, thereby justifying a separate terminology.
NORMAL AGING
The differentiation of MCI from normality is an important area of study. Whereas clear diagnostic and research criteria for dementia are now available in interWWW.ARCHNEUROL.COM

2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Downloaded From: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/ by a Griffith University User on 04/18/2016

national disease classification systems, the notion of normal

aging is less well understood. As disabilities associated
with aging become treatable, they may be considered
pathologic conditions rather than inevitable features of
the physiological aging process. Because of evolving ideas
of what constitutes normal aging, cross-sectional comparisons of older and younger populations are likely to
be misleading because of these age-cohort effects.
Within population studies, the concept of successful aging is sometimes proposed as an alternative to normality. Successful aging refers to a state of health in which
there are measurable positive features across a spectrum of health measures. It extends beyond cognitive and
functional definitions by considering the value of selfrelated psychological well-being. The Canadian Study of
Health and Aging concluded that self-rated psychological well-being is a potential outcome measure for longitudinal investigation of individuals with either no cognitive impairment or minimal cognitive impairment.14
Previous attempts at characterizing cognitive changes
intrinsic to normal aging have produced several terms,
such as benign senescent forgetfulness, age-associated
memory impairment, and age-associated cognitive decline.15-17 These terms are generally meant to reflect the
extremes of normal aging rather than to describe a precursor of pathologic aging. While some investigations of
these concepts demonstrate dementia conversion rates
that are not different from those of healthy subjects,18 others have indicated an increased conversion rate.19,20 Subjects with MCI have a condition that is different from
normal aging, and longitudinal outcome results indicate
that they are likely to progress to AD at an accelerated
rate.3,21
EPIDEMIOLOGY
There has been little work on the incidence or prevalence of MCI as defined herein. This is partially because
of the recent characterization of this condition. Population-based studies, especially those that ascertain cases
based on psychometric test results rather than symptoms, may identify a population of individuals with mild
cognitive dysfunction that differs from the amnestic MCI
described clinically. Prevalence rates for age-associated
memory impairment in these studies range from 17% to
34%,16,22-25 while age-associated cognitive decline has been
estimated as having a prevalence of 26%.17 Other investigators have indicated that the prevalence rate for conditions such as age-associated memory impairment can
range up to 85%, depending on the specific memory tests
used to fulfill the criteria.25 In the Canadian Study of
Health and Aging, the classification of cognitive impairment with no dementia had a prevalence rate of 17%; this
is likely a more inclusive term than MCI alone.14
An important factor in considering the frequency of
MCI concerns the source of subjects for a given study. It
is likely that a small number of subjects with MCI will
present to memory disorders or dementia clinics. Most
individuals who present to a dementia clinic probably already have dementia. However, if one surveys a community population, it is probable that more cases of MCI will
be found.
(REPRINTED) ARCH NEUROL / VOL 58, DEC 2001
1987

Mild Cognitive
Impairment
(Amnestic)

Alzheimer's Disease

Mild Cognitive
Impairment
(Multiple Domains Slightly Impaired)

Alzheimer's Disease
Vascular Dementia
? Normal Aging

Mild Cognitive
Impairment
(Single Nonmemory Domain)

Frontotemporal Dementia
Lewy Body Dementia
Vascular Dementia
Primary Progressive Aphasia
Parkinson's Disease
Alzheimer's Disease

Figure 4. Heterogeneity of the term mild cognitive impairment.

HETEROGENEITY
All individuals who present clinically with mild cognitive symptoms may not share the same fate ultimately.
Some may go on to develop AD, while others may progress
to another dementia. It is possible that some of the subjects will never progress to any significant extent. This
broad group of individuals with mild cognitive complaints could be considered as having MCI. Recognizing that there are multiple sources of heterogeneity in
such a classification, it is desirable to further specify criteria for subsets of MCI.
Thus far, we have focused herein on the most common subset of subjects with MCI, those with amnestic MCI.
These are individuals who present with a subjective memory
complaint, preferably corroborated by an informant, and
have an objective memory impairment compared with age
and education norms, but who are performing reasonably
well on indexes of general cognitive function and have generally preserved activities of daily living. As discussed earlier, these subjects do not meet standard criteria for AD.
While subjects with amnestic MCI usually progress to AD
at a high rate,3,4,6 not all will progress (Figure 2). On the
other hand, some subjects who present with amnestic MCI
may have other pathologic processes involving the medial
temporal lobes, eg, hippocampal sclerosis.26 It is as yet uncertain whether clinical variations of AD or disorders with
concomitant AD, such as dementia with Lewy bodies, can
present as amnestic MCI. There is evidence that subjects
with dementia associated with Lewy bodies have relative
preservation of the hippocampi, making this amnestic MCI
presentation less likely for subjects diagnosed as having dementia with Lewy bodies.27
It theoretically should be possible to select a different subset of subjects with MCI by altering the core definition and criteria. Figure 4 depicts other hypothetical
presentations of MCI in addition to amnestic MCI. Although none of these other prodromal conditions have been
validated, MCI could be defined as mild impairment in multiple cognitive domains, without requiring memory deficit.28 These subjects may have multiple areas of cognitive
impairment that fall outside of predicted norms, but none
are sufficiently severe to constitute dementia. Subjects with
MCI defined in this fashion may also progress to AD, but
they could also progress to other disorders.
Finally, MCI could conceivably present as impairment in a single cognitive domain other than memory. For
example, a pronounced language disturbance might
progress to primary progressive aphasia, or an alteration
WWW.ARCHNEUROL.COM

2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Downloaded From: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/ by a Griffith University User on 04/18/2016

in attentional abilities or comportment and a dysexecutive syndrome might progress to frontotemporal dementia. Although no such MCI cases have been reported, it
is reasonable to posit a prodromal period for frontotemporal dementia, analogous to amnestic MCI as a precursor of AD.
It has become apparent that heterogeneity of MCI
is derived from differences in causes, clinical symptoms, and research methods. For clarity, it is recommended that the term MCI be qualified with an appropriate modifier, such as amnestic MCI, to inform the
reader as to the specific criteria being used to characterize the condition and its most likely outcome.
NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Screening instruments are routinely used to quantify the
degree of cognitive impairment in patients with dementia
and are likely to be particularly helpful early in a dementing illness, when functional and behavioral disturbances
are absent.29,30 The value of neuropsychological measures
in helping to identify early cases of dementia has been documented by cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. Crosssectional comparisons of patients clinically diagnosed as
having mild AD compared with older healthy persons have
shown that patients with mild AD consistently perform
worse than their comparison subjects.31-33 Patients with early
AD are impaired on tests of memory, including tests of delayed recall, and often on tests of new learning.34,35 Deficiencies in language, executive function, and attention are
also present in many patients with mild AD, and deficits
in more than one cognitive domain are a better indicator
of mild AD than memory impairment alone.36 These crosssectional data indicate that sensitive neuropsychological
measures can help identify cases of AD at early stages.
Longitudinal studies5,36-38 of older healthy persons
at high risk for developing dementia because of advanced age have shown that persons who later develop
AD perform more poorly on cognitive tests at baseline
compared with those who remain free of dementia. These
longitudinal data indicate that neuropsychological tests
may help to identify persons likely to convert to MCI or
AD before they meet conventional diagnostic criteria.
Alzheimers disease and MCI cannot be diagnosed
by neuropsychological tests alone, and clinical judgment is always required. First, performance on neuropsychological tests is affected by many factors, including education, age, cultural background, and illnesses
other than AD.39 Second, neuropsychological measures
cannot fully distinguish among different types of dementia, because there is substantial overlap in neuropsychological profiles.40,41 The usefulness of any battery for
identifying cases of MCI will depend on its composition,
size, and supporting data. A brief battery, including measures of new learning, delayed recall, attention, and executive function, could provide valuable information for
screening and diagnosis if interpreted properly.
NEUROIMAGING
Neuroimaging potentially is a powerful tool for the differential diagnosis of cognitive impairment and for moni(REPRINTED) ARCH NEUROL / VOL 58, DEC 2001
1988

toring change. Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies42-44 have used structural (computed tomography and
magnetic resonance imaging) and functional (singlephoton emission computed tomography, positron emission tomography, and magnetic resonance spectroscopy) modalities in the evaluation of MCI. There is
agreement on the occurrence of hippocampal atrophy in
amnestic MCI compared with cognitively intact controls, and on the finding that hippocampal atrophy can
predict the rate of conversion from MCI to AD.43 Hippocampal atrophy seen in MCI can be correlated with
autopsy evidence of atrophy and neuronal loss.45
In addition to hippocampal atrophy, changes in the
entorhinal cortex may enhance the sensitivity of an early
diagnosis of MCI or AD. However, a recent study46 comparing entorhinal measures with hippocampal volumes
indicates that the entorhinal measurement may not always be superior. Neuroimaging measures of change are
more informative than a measurement made at one point
in time. Rates of hippocampal atrophy for individuals who
convert from control subjects to MCI or from MCI to AD
are comparable, suggesting that the MCI group may be
transitional to early AD.47
Functional neuroimaging may also aid in the detection of subjects with MCI.48,49 In group studies using
positron emission tomography, early metabolic deficits
in the temporoparietal region have been demonstrated
in those at risk for familial AD48 based on family history
and those with an apolipoprotein E4 genotype.50 Similarly, patients with a genetic risk for AD also show metabolic reduction in the posterior cingulate cortex.48 Magnetic resonance spectroscopy may eventually provide
further evidence of functional changes in MCI, although
investigations have been limited thus far.51
In summary, neuroimaging studies support the view
that MCI, especially amnestic MCI, shares features with
AD, such as hippocampal atrophy, so that the presence
or development of atrophy will therefore predict conversion to clinical AD. Hippocampal atrophy, however,
may not be specific, and careful selection and follow-up
of subjects are important. Future directions are likely to
concentrate on measuring rates of change on neuroimaging studies and on finding the shortest intervals necessary to demonstrate significant changes.
NEUROPATHOLOGY
Little is known about the neuropathology of MCI and related disorders, because there have been few longitudinal studies that include neuropathological confirmation. Subjects with mild impairment are unlikely to die
of MCI, so neuropathological information is obtained only
when someone who happens to have the clinical designation of MCI dies of other causes. In a neuropathological series52 of 16 patients diagnosed clinically as having
MCI or AD and a CDR of 0.5, all demonstrated neurofibrillary tangles in the hippocampus and entorhinal cortex, while 7 also had many senile plaques in the neocortex. Other indexes of neuronal degeneration, such as
changes in synaptic markers and neuronal loss, were seen
in the CA1 region of the hippocampus as assessed by unbiased stereology.
WWW.ARCHNEUROL.COM

2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Downloaded From: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/ by a Griffith University User on 04/18/2016

In a clinical pathological series53 of 62 patients (39

without dementia, 15 with a CDR of 0.5, and 8 with established AD), all of those with CDR 0.5 ratings had the
neuropathological features of AD. These investigators postulated that senile plaques in the neocortex may represent the initial event in AD and may escalate age-related
formation of neurofibrillary tangles in the medial temporal lobe beyond the usual level. Neocortical senile
plaques and entorhinal tangles were also seen in some
subjects with no detectable cognitive decline, suggesting that there may be a neuropathological picture of AD
that precedes an MCI state.
In another report54 of 10 autopsy cases with clinical
diagnoses of amnestic MCI, 6 met neuropathological criteria for AD, while an additional 2 had argyrophilic grain
disease. Two cases had neurofibrillary tangleonly disease. Data from the Religious Orders Study have supported clinical observations that the causes of MCI may
be heterogeneous, because they have shown that non-AD
disorders that involve the medial temporal lobe may account for the memory impairment.28 When these rare
non-AD disorders are excluded, most pathologic conditions of MCI are likely to be early-stage AD.
In summary, most patients with amnestic MCI demonstrate neurofibrillary pathologic conditions in the medial temporal lobes. It is possible that these neurofibrillary
changes contribute to the memory impairment. Some evidence indicates that patients with CDR 0 ratings (no
memory impairment) also have neurofibrillary tangles in
the medial temporal lobe; hence, this finding does not always correlate with a memory impairment. Most patients
with MCI appear to have the neuropathological changes
of AD, and a few clinically similar subjects have non-AD
pathologic conditions.
BIOMARKERS
Because MCI may be clinically and pathologically heterogeneous, biomarkers may be particularly useful for
identifying subtypes. However, there are no definitive data
on the usefulness of biomarkers in classifying MCI.
Biomarkers in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) have
been used as indicators of the degenerative process of AD.
Several laboratories have shown that CSF tau concentrations are significantly elevated in the CSF and that
A!-42 levels are significantly decreased in patients with
AD, compared with age-matched cognitively healthy control subjects. 55 Tau levels are also significantly increased in mildly demented subjects with AD (MiniMental State Examination score of 25), yielding sensitivity
and specificity values approaching 0.90. More recently,
elevated CSF tau has been confirmed in autopsy-proven
AD cases.56
Longitudinal studies57 have demonstrated that nearly
all subjects with MCI who convert to AD have high CSF
tau values, whereas in nonprogressive MCI, tau levels remain low. Furthermore, CSF tau levels do not seem to
increase during the course of AD.57 This suggests that the
measurement of CSF tau might be used effectively for
identifying incipient AD among patients diagnosed clinically as having MCI.58 In summary, biomarkers could be
useful in a multistep approach to the diagnosis of MCI
(REPRINTED) ARCH NEUROL / VOL 58, DEC 2001
1989

or dementia, and disease-specific biomarkers could be

useful in treatment intervention follow-up.
PROGRESSION
Several longitudinal studies3,4,6 of aging and dementia
provide information regarding outcomes of patients with
MCI. In addition, some studies36,37 of aging shed light on
cognitive progression in individuals who are functioning
normally at one point in time, but who subsequently develop MCI or AD. Both types of studies provide information regarding the ultimate usefulness of the designation
of MCI.
Using the criteria outlined in the table for amnestic
MCI, investigators at the Mayo Alzheimers Disease Research Center longitudinally observed 155 individuals
with a clinical diagnosis of MCI.3,21 These individuals
evolved to dementia at a rate of approximately 12% per
year. Variables that tended to predict a more rapid decline included apolipoprotein E4 carrier status, poor performance on a cued recall test, and atrophic hippocampi on MRI. As indicated in Figure 2, up to 80% of
this group had evolved to dementia in approximately 6
years.
In Toronto, Ontario, investigators observed a group
of subjects with memory complaints who had been referred to primary care practitioners.4 These subjects were
followed up longitudinally for 2 years, and approximately 20% progressed to dementia. These investigators believed that performance on a memory test and possibly apolipoprotein E4 status were predictors of decline.
Investigators from the University of Washington Alzheimers Disease Patient Registry, Seattle, also followed
up a group of memory-impaired individuals who did not
meet criteria for dementia.6 These subjects were observed for up to 48 months, and approximately 50% of
the group progressed to dementia during that time. These
investigators did not find any specific psychometric tests
that predicted who was more likely to become impaired.
In various studies3,4,6 using different MCI criteria,
subjects with memory problems that fall short of dementia progress to dementia or AD at a rate of between 10%
to 15% per year, making this condition an identifiable
risk factor for the development of AD. These studies, taken
together, indicate that different criteria in multiple studies may be identifying the common phenomenology of
amnestic MCI.
TREATMENT
There is no evidence that MCI, once diagnosed, can be
successfully treated. Inclusion criteria for MCI trials will
likely continue to focus on subjects with amnestic MCI
who do not meet diagnostic criteria for AD. The end points
for MCI trials will depend on the presumed benefits of
the intervention. Some interventions may result in improvement of symptoms. End points to demonstrate this
type of benefit will likely be limited to sensitive tests of
delayed memory (verbal and visual) and clinicians global
ratings. In other cases, slowing the rate of progression
may be the goal, so delaying a clinical milestone (eg, deWWW.ARCHNEUROL.COM

2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Downloaded From: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/ by a Griffith University User on 04/18/2016

velopment of a second domain of difficulty) or conversion to clinically diagnosable AD will be the appropriate
end points. Several clinical trials have already been initiated to test the use of cholinesterase inhibitors, antioxidants, and anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with
MCI. Most of these trials are based on the recently initiated trial being conducted by the Alzheimers Disease
Cooperative Study.59
Safety and tolerability will be required for drugs used
in MCI trials, because many subjects will be treated at
the early stage of the disease when symptoms are mild.
Determination of optimal drug dosage should be worked
out in individuals with AD, when possible, because dosage-finding studies expose individuals to a greater risk
of adverse effects, and the risk-benefit ratio may be different for subjects with MCI vs AD.
Many classes of agents can be considered for use in
subjects with amnestic MCI. Cholinesterase inhibitors may
be considered for use for their symptomatic effects and
circumstantial laboratory and clinical evidence that they
may have a biologically modifying effect on the processing of amyloid or other mechanisms in the progression
of the disease.60 Hormones, particularly estrogens, have
been epidemiologically demonstrated to be associated with
delayed onset of the appearance of AD.61,62
Histological and epidemiological studies63,64 suggest the presence of inflammation early in AD. Clinical
trials of the effect of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors in patients with AD and MCI are under way. Antioxidants such as vitamin E have been demonstrated to
delay the time to clinical end points in patients with moderate AD,65 and vitamin E is being studied in patients with
MCI.59 Interruption or modification of protein metabolism is believed by many AD researchers to represent the
best approach to disease-modifying therapy.66 Agents that
interfere with A! production and aggregation or that reduce A! burden may confer protection against A!mediated neurodegeneration in AD.66,67 Another molecular approach focuses on the development of agents that
interfere with tau phosphorylation or aggregation.68 Finally, Gingko biloba may have antioxidant properties69
and will undergo large-scale testing in primary prevention trials. Treatments should not be prescribed based
on current speculations, but must await confirmation from
well-designed clinical trials.
ETHICAL ISSUES
The concept of MCI raises several ethical issues. The primary ethical questions concern the strength of the evidence that MCI is a valid pathologic condition, and
whether the benefits of establishing this new category outweigh the risks to patients. Making an accurate diagnosis is a key element in the practice of medicine and has
several benefits. It helps clinicians identify specific conditions and aids in the choice of appropriate treatment.
In addition, the establishment of a diagnosis enhances
communication among clinicians, helps provide information to patients, identifies a need for understanding
and support, and stimulates research. On the other hand,
labeling patients with a disease has psychological and psychosocial consequences. Therefore, investigators and cli(REPRINTED) ARCH NEUROL / VOL 58, DEC 2001
1990

nicians who are proposing MCI as a new syndrome must

develop the data needed to convince skeptics that it is a
valid entity.70
Patients diagnosed as having amnestic MCI often
complain about memory loss. This suggests that individuals with MCI have insight and should be told about
this diagnostic label. On the other hand, some individuals with MCI, especially if ascertained by populationbased testing, may be unaware of their memory impairment or may believe that their symptoms are related to
normal aging or lifelong problems. Patients who present clinically should probably be managed differently
from patients discovered by applying research criteria to
large populations.
Because amnestic MCI progresses to AD at a high rate,
it is associated with significant morbidity, potential economic loss to individuals and society, and frustration and
distress in caregivers. Mild cognitive impairment itself is
therefore an appropriate target for treatments to improve
symptoms and to reverse or prevent the condition.
RECENT LITERATURE
Since the Current Concepts in Mild Cognitive Impairment conference, several relevant studies have appeared
in the literature. These will be mentioned without an evaluative comment because they were not reviewed by the
conference attendees.
Investigators at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, followed up a group of subjects with a diagnosis of questionable dementia (CDR 0.5) for 3 years and found that
this group progressed to AD at a rate of 6% per year.71 This
study documented the importance of the clinical interview in the characterization of these subjects. An editorial comment13 on this article called attention to the distinction between a clinical diagnosis of MCI and the use
of rating scales. Another study72 on these subjects demonstrated the usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging
based volumetric measurements of the entorhinal cortex
in predicting progression in individuals with questionable dementia. A study73 from France applied a modified
version of MCI criteria to a population of subjects being
observed longitudinally and found that certain neuropsychological criteria for MCI, when retrospectively applied, were unreliable in characterizing the progression of
subjects over time. A Washington University research group
performed an autopsy-based study of their subjects with
a CDR 0.5 diagnosis and found that all had a dementing
illness; 88% had neuropathological features of AD.74 A
study75 from Sweden demonstrated the reliability of impaired glucose metabolism and a cognitive measure of visuospatial performance in predicting progression from MCI
to AD. Finally, a recent evidence-based medicine practice review76 of early detection and MCI by the American
Academy of Neurology recommended that subjects with
MCI be identified and followed up because of their increased risk for developing AD.
SUMMARY
Mild cognitive impairment is becoming an increasingly
recognized clinical entity. Most clinicians are aware of
WWW.ARCHNEUROL.COM

2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Downloaded From: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/ by a Griffith University User on 04/18/2016

patients who appear to have a mild deficit in memory or

some other aspect of cognition but who are not demented. There are important differences between clinical practice settings and research settings. For example,
researchers use comprehensive neuropsychological testing to document that memory loss is clinically significant and to make certain there are no other domains of
significant cognitive impairment that might mimic criteria for mild AD. Clinicians should be wary about designating a patient as having MCI in the absence of specific criteria. Although therapies are being developed that
might prevent progression of amnestic MCI to AD, there
is no evidence to support prescribing therapeutic agents
to patients with MCI at this time. Our conference discussion highlighted the current thinking on MCI from a
recent international conference. Mild cognitive impairment deserves recognition and further study because, as
preventive treatments for AD become available, it will become incumbent on clinicians to identify persons at risk
for AD and those with the earliest signs of clinical impairment. It may be that at least some of what is now designated as MCI will be recognized in the future as the
earliest symptomatic stage of AD. Such an evolution will
be stimulated by evidence that pharmacological therapy
is beneficial at this stage and by the clinicians ability to
recognize earlier forms of AD.
Accepted for publication July 30, 2001.
This study was supported by an educational grant
from Pfizer, Inc, New York, NY, and Eisai Inc, Teaneck, NJ.
Drs Petersen and Doody contributed equally to the
preparation of the manuscript.
Participants in the Current Concepts in Mild Cognitive Impairment conference include: Ronald C. Petersen, PhD,
MD (cochair), and Clifford Jack, Jr, MD, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, Minn; Rachelle Doody, MD, PhD (cochair), Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex; Hiroyuki Arai, MD, Tohoku University School of Medicine,
Sendai, Japan; David Bennett, MD, Rush Alzheimers Disease Center, Chicago, Ill; Christopher Clark, MD, and Jason Karlawish, MD, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Jeffrey L. Cummings, MD, University of California,
Los Angeles, School of Medicine; Steven T. DeKosky, MD,
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa;
Mony de Leon, MD, and Steven Ferris, PhD, New York University Medical Center, New York, NY; Davangere P.
Devanand, MD, and Mary Sano, PhD, Columbia University, New York; Dennis W. Dickson, MD, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville, Jacksonville, Fla; Howard Feldman, MD, University of British Columbia, Vancouver; Giovanni B. Frisoni,
MD, IRCCS San Giovanni di DioFBF, Brescia, Italy; Norman L. Foster, MD, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor;
Douglas Galasko, MD, and Leon Thal, MD, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University of California, San Diego;
Michael Grundman, MD, University of California, San Diego;
William Jagust, MD, University of California, Davis; Jeffrey Kaye, MD, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland; David Knopman, MD, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis (now at Mayo Clinic Rochester); Amos D. Korczyn,
MD, Tel Aviv University Medical School, Tel Aviv, Israel;
Alexander Kurz, MD, Technische University, Munich, Germany; Paul Leber, MD, Neuro-Pharm Group, LLC, Po(REPRINTED) ARCH NEUROL / VOL 58, DEC 2001
1991

tomac, Md; Richard Mohs, PhD, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York; John C. Morris, MD, Joseph L. Price, PhD,
and Martha Storandt, PhD, Washington University, St Louis,
Mo; Peter V. Rabins, MD, and Juan C. Troncoso, MD, The
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Md;
Karen Ritchie, MPsych, PhD, French National Institute of
Medical Research, Montpellier, France; Kenneth Rockwood, MD, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia; Martin Rossor, MA, MD, FRCP, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, England; Frederick A.
Schmitt, PhD, University of Kentucky, Lexington; Jacques
Touchon, MD, Hopital Gui de Chauliac, Montpellier, France;
Peter Whitehouse, MD, PhD, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; and Bengt Winblad, MD, PhD, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Corresponding author and reprints: Ronald C. Petersen,
PhD, MD, Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (e-mail:
peter8@mayo.edu).
REFERENCES
1. Schenk D, Barbour R, Dunn W, et al. Immunization with amyloid-! attenuates
Alzheimer-diseaselike pathology in the PDAPP mouse. Nature. 1999;400:173177.
2. Vassar R, Bennett BD, Babu-Khan S, et al. !-Secretase cleavage of Alzheimers
amyloid precursor protein by the transmembrane aspartic protease BACE. Science. 1999;286:735-741.
3. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol. 1999;56:
303-308.
4. Tierney MC, Szalai JP, Snow WG, et al. Prediction of probable Alzheimers disease in memory-impaired patients: a prospective longitudinal study. Neurology.
1996;46:661-665.
5. Rubin DH, Storandt M, Miller JP, et al. A prospective study of cognitive function
and onset of dementia in cognitively healthy elders. Arch Neurol. 1998;55:395401.
6. Bowen J, Teri L, Kukull W, McCormick W, McCurry SM, Larson EB. Progression
to dementia in patients with isolated memory loss. Lancet. 1997;349:763-765.
7. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, Fourth Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association;
1994.
8. The National Institute on Aging, and Reagan Institute Working Group on Diagnostic Criteria for the Neuropathological Assessment of Alzheimers Disease. Consensus recommendations for the postmortem diagnosis of Alzheimers disease. Neurobiol Aging. 1997;18(4 suppl):S1-S2.
9. McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, Katzman R, Price D, Stadlan EM, for the
National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke
Alzheimers Disease and Related Disorders Association Work Group. Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimers disease: report of the NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on
Alzheimers Disease. Neurology. 1984;34:939-944.
10. Galasko D, Hansen LA, Katzman R, et al. Clinical-neuropathological correlations
in Alzheimers disease and related dementias. Arch Neurol. 1994;51:888-895.
11. Morris JC. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules.
Neurology. 1993;43:2412-2414.
12. Reisberg B, Ferris SH, de Leon MJ, Crook T. The Global Deterioration Scale for
assessment of primary degenerative dementia. Am J Psychiatr. 1982;139:11361139.
13. Petersen RC. Mild cognitive impairment or questionable dementia [editorial]?
Arch Neurol. 2000;57:643-644.
14. Graham JE, Rockwood K, Beattie BL, et al. Prevalence and severity of cognitive
impairment with and without dementia in an elderly population. Lancet. 1997;
349:1793-1796.
15. Kral VA. Senescent forgetfulness: benign and malignant. CMAJ. 1962;86:257260.
16. Crook T, Bartus RT, Ferris SH, Whitehouse P, Cohen GD, Gershon S, for the
National Institute of Mental Health Work Group. Age-associated memory
impairment: proposed diagnostic criteria and measures of clinical change.
Dev Neuropsychol. 1986;2:261-276.
17. Levy R. Aging-associated cognitive decline. Int Psychogeriatr. 1994;6:63-68.
18. Hanninen T, Hallikainen M, Koivisto K, et al. A follow-up study of age-associated
memory impairment: neuropsychological predictors of dementia. J Am Geriatr
Soc. 1995;43:1007-1015.
19. Richards M, Touchon J, Ledesert B, Richie K. Cognitive decline in aging: are AAMI
and AACD distinct entities? Int J Geriatr Psychiatr. 1999;14:534-540.

WWW.ARCHNEUROL.COM

2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Downloaded From: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/ by a Griffith University User on 04/18/2016

20. Lane F, Snowdon J. A longitudinal survey of suburban elderly. In: Lovibond P,

Wilson P, eds. Clinical and Abnormal Psychology. Amsterdam, the Netherlands:
Elsevier; 1989:365-376.
21. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Ivnik RJ, et al. Apolipoprotein E status as a predictor of
the development of Alzheimers disease in memory-impaired individuals. JAMA.
1995;273:1274-1278.
22. Barker A, Jones R, Jennison C. A prevalence study of age-associated memory
impairment. Br J Psychiatr. 1995;167:642-648.
23. Coria F, Gomez de Caso JA, Minguez F, Rodriquez-Artalejo F, Claveria LE. Prevalence of age-associated memory impairment and dementia in a rural community.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr. 1993;56:973-976.
24. Larrabee GJ, Crook TH. Estimated prevalence of age-associated memory
impairment derived from standardized tests of memory function. Int Psychogeriatr. 1994;6:95-104.
25. Smith GE, Ivnik RJ, Petersen RC, Malec JF, Kokmen E, Tangalos E. Ageassociated memory impairment diagnoses: problems of reliability and concerns
for terminology. Psychol Aging. 1991;6:551-558.
26. Dickson DW, Davies P, Bevona C, et al. Hippocampal sclerosis: a common pathological feature of dementia in very old ("80 years of age) humans. Acta Neuropathol (Berl). 1994;88:212-221.
27. Lippa CF, Johnson R, Smith TW. The medial temporal lobe in dementia with Lewy
bodies: a comparative study with Alzheimers disease. Ann Neurol. 1998;43:102106.
28. Mufson EJ, Chen EY, Cochran EJ, Beckett LA, Bennett DA, Kordower JH. Entorhinal cortex !-amyloid load in individuals with mild cognitive impairment. Exp
Neurol. 1999;158:469-490.
29. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. Mini-Mental State: a practical method
for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;
12:189-198.
30. Rosen WG, Mohs RC, Davis KL. A new rating scale for Alzheimers disease. Am
J Psychiatr. 1984;141:1356-1364.
31. Knopman DS, Ryberg S. A verbal memory test with high predictive accuracy for
dementia of the Alzheimer type. Arch Neurol. 1989;46:141-145.
32. Storandt M, Hill RD. Very mild senile dementia of the Alzheimer type, II: psychometric test performance. Arch Neurol. 1989;46:383-386.
33. Welsh KA, Butters N, Hughes JP, Mohs RC, Heyman A. Detection and staging of
dementia in Alzheimers disease: use of the neuropsychological measures developed for the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimers Disease. Arch
Neurol. 1992;49:448-452.
34. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Ivnik RJ, Kokmen E, Tangalos EG. Memory function in
very early Alzheimers disease. Neurology. 1994;44:867-872.
35. Welsh K, Butters N, Hughes J, Mohs R, Heyman A. Detection of abnormal memory
decline in mild cases of Alzheimers disease using CERAD neuropsychological
measures. Arch Neurol. 1991;48:278-281.
36. Masur DM, Sliwinski M, Lipton RB, Blau AD, Crystal HA. Neuropsychological prediction of dementia and the absence of dementia in healthy elderly persons. Neurology. 1994;44:1427-1432.
37. Dartigues JF, Commenges D, Letenneur L, et al. Cognitive predictors of dementia in elderly community residents. Neuroepidemiology. 1997;16:29-39.
38. Howieson DB, Dame A, Camicioli R, Sexton G, Payami H, Kaye JA. Cognitive markers preceding Alzheimers dementia in the healthy oldest old. J Am Geriatr Soc.
1997;45:584-589.
39. Inouye SK, Albert MS, Mohs RC, Sun K, Berkman LF. Cognitive performance in
a high-functioning community-dwelling elderly population. J Gerontol A Biol Sci
Med Sci. 1993;48:M146-M151.
40. Heyman A, Fillenbaum GG, Welsh-Bohmer KA, et al, for the Consortium to
Establish a Registry for Alzheimers Disease. Cerebral infarcts in patients with
autopsy-proven Alzheimers disease. Neurology. 1998;51(pt 18):159-162.
41. Ferman TJ, Boeve BF, Smith GE, et al. REM sleep behavior disorder and dementia: cognitive differences when compared with AD. Neurology. 1999;52:951957.
42. Jack CR Jr, Petersen RC, Xu YC, et al. Medial temporal atrophy on MRI in normal
aging and very mild Alzheimers disease. Neurology. 1997;49:786-794.
43. Jack CR Jr, Petersen RC, Xu YC, et al. Prediction of AD with MRI-based hippocampal volume in mild cognitive impairment. Neurology. 1999;52:1397-1403.
44. Fox NC, Warrington EK, Seiffer AL, Agnew SK, Rossor MN. Presymptomatic cognitive deficits in individuals at risk of familial Alzheimers disease: a longitudinal
prospective study. Brain. 1998;121:1631-1639.
45. Bobinski M, de Leon MJ, Tarnawski M, et al. Neuronal and volume loss in CA1
of the hippocampal formation uniquely predicts duration and severity of Alzheimer disease. Brain Res. 1998;805:267-269.
46. Xu YC, Jack CR Jr, OBrien PC, et al. Usefulness of MRI measures of entorhinal
cortex versus hippocampus in AD. Neurology. 2000;54:1760-1767.
47. Jack CR Jr, Petersen RC, Xu Y, et al. Rates of hippocampal atrophy correlate
with change in clinical status in aging and AD. Neurology. 2000;55:484-489.
48. Kennedy AM, Frackowiak RS, Newman SK, et al. Deficits in cerebral glucose me-

(REPRINTED) ARCH NEUROL / VOL 58, DEC 2001

1992

49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.

69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.

tabolism demonstrated by positron emission tomography in individuals at risk

of familial Alzheimers disease. Neurosci Lett. 1995;186:17-20.
Berent S, Giordani B, Foster N, et al. Neuropsychological function and cerebral
glucose utilization in isolated memory impairment and Alzheimers disease.
J Psychiatr Res. 1999;33:7-16.
Reiman EM, Caselli RJ, Lang S, et al. Preclinical evidence of Alzheimers disease
in persons homozygous for the E4 allele for apolipoprotein E. N Engl J Med. 1996;
334:752-758.
Kantarci K, Jack CR Jr, Xu YC, et al. Regional metabolic patterns in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimers disease: a 1H MRS study. Neurology. 2000;55:
210-217.
Troncosco JC, Martin LJ, Dal Forno G, Kawas CH. Neuropathology in controls
and demented subjects from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. Neurobiol Aging. 1996;17:365-371.
Price JL, Morris JC. Tangles and plaques in nondemented aging and preclinical Alzheimers disease. Ann Neurol. 1999;45:358-368.
Petersen RC, Parisi JE, Dickson DW, et al. Neuropathologic substrate of mild
cognitive impairment [abstract]. Neurobiol Aging. 2000;21(suppl 1S):S198.
Galasko D, Clark C, Chang L, et al. Assessment CSF levels of tau protein in mildly
demented patients with Alzheimers disease. Neurology. 1997;48:632-635.
Andreasen N, Vanmechelen E, Van de Voorde A, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid tau
protein as a biochemical marker for Alzheimers disease: a community based follow up study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr. 1998;64:298-305.
Sunderland T, Wolozin B, Galasko D, et al. Longitudinal stability of CSF tau levels in Alzheimer patients. Biol Psychiatry. 1999;46:750-755.
Galasko D. Cerebrospinal fluid opens a window on Alzheimers disease. Arch Neurol. 1999;56:655-656.
Grundman M. Vitamin E in Alzheimer disease: the basis for additional clinical
trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;71:630S-636S.
Lahiri DK, Farlow MR, Sambamurti K. The secretion of amyloid !-peptides is
inhibited in the tacrine-treated human neuroblastoma cells. Brain Res Mol Brain
Res. 1998;62:131-140.
Yaffe K, Sawaya G, Liebergurg I, Grady D. Estrogen therapy in postmenopausal
women: effects on cognitive function and dementia. JAMA. 1998;279:688-695.
Waring SC, Rocca WA, Petersen RC, OBrien PC, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E. Postmenopausal estrogen replacement therapy and risk of AD: a population-based
study. Neurology. 1999;52:965-970.
McGeer PL, Schulzer M, McGeer EG. Arthritis and anti-inflammatory agents as
possible protective factors for Alzheimers disease: a review of 17 epidemiologic studies. Neurology. 1996;47:425-432.
Pasinetti GM. Cyclooxygenase and inflammation in Alzheimers disease: experimental approaches and clinical interventions. J Neurosci Res. 1998;54:1-6.
Sano M, Ernesto C, Thomas RG, et al, for The Alzheimers Disease Cooperative
Study. A controlled trial of selegiline, alpha-tocopherol, or both as treatment for
Alzheimers disease. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:1216-1222.
Wolfe MS. Secretase targets for Alzheimers disease: identification and therapeutic potential. J Med Chem. 2001;44:2039-2060.
Wolfe MS, Xia W, Ostaszewski BL, Diehl TS, Kimberly WT, Selkoe DJ. Two transmembrane aspartates in presenilin-1 required for presenilin endoproteolysis and
#-secretase activity. Nature. 1999;398:513-517.
Schneider A, Biernat J, von Bergen M, Mandelkow E, Mandelkow EM. Phosphorylation that detaches tau protein from microtubules (Ser262, Ser214) also
protects it against aggregation into Alzheimer paired helical filaments. Biochemistry. 1999;38:3549-3558.
Le Bars PL, Katz MM, Berman N, Itil TM, Freedman AM, Schatzberg AF, for the North
American EGb Study Group. A placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial
of an extract of Ginkgo biloba for dementia. JAMA. 1997;278:1327-1332.
Christensen H, Henderson AS, Jorm AF, Mackinnon AJ, Scott R, Korten AE. ICD-10
mild cognitive disorder: epidemiological evidence on its validity. Psychol Med.
1995;25:105-120.
Daly E, Zaitchck D, Copeland M, Schmahmann J, Gunther J, Albert M. Predicting conversion to Alzheimers disease using standardized clinical information.
Arch Neurol. 2000;57:675-680.
Killiany RJ, Gomez-Isla T, Moss M, et al. Use of structural magnetic resonance
imaging to predict who will get Alzheimers disease. Ann Neurol. 2000;47:430439.
Ritchie K, Artero S, Touchon J. Classification criteria for mild cognitive impairment: a population-based validation study. Neurology. 2001;56:37-42.
Morris JC, Storandt M, Miller JP, et al. Mild cognitive impairment represents earlystage Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 2001;58:397-405.
Arnaiz A, Jelic V, Almkvist O, et al. Impaired cerebral glucose metabolism and
cognitive functioning predict deterioration in mild cognitive impairment. Neuroreport. 2001;12:851-855.
Petersen RC, Stevens J, Ganguli M, Tangalos EG, Cummings J, DeKosky ST. Practice parameter: early detection of dementia: mild cognitive impairment. Neurology. 2001;56:1133-1142.

WWW.ARCHNEUROL.COM

2001 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Downloaded From: http://archneur.jamanetwork.com/ by a Griffith University User on 04/18/2016