#1038 Beyond Memory Loss: Alzheimer’s Disease Care and Management (20 Credits/Hours)

Course Details:
Launch Date: August 5, 2025
Expires: August 31, 2027

Course #1038
20 Credits/Hours

1. Introduction

Introduction to Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia

Definition and Overview

Dementia represents a comprehensive term describing a condition that significantly impacts an individual’s ability to remember, think clearly, and make decisions while performing everyday activities (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Unlike normal aging, dementia is not an inevitable part of the aging process but rather encompasses a range of neurological conditions that progressively deteriorate cognitive functioning to such an extent that it interferes with daily life and activities (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Alzheimer’s disease stands as the most prevalent form of dementia, accounting for approximately 60% to 80% of all dementia cases and affecting an estimated 6.7 million older adults in the United States (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). The condition represents a complex brain disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills, ultimately progressing to compromise the ability to carry out even the simplest tasks (National Institute on Aging) (2024).

 

The significance of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias extends far beyond individual patient impact, representing one of the most pressing public health challenges of our time. Current projections indicate that by 2060, nearly 14 million adults are expected to have Alzheimer’s disease in the United States, reflecting the growing burden this condition will place on healthcare systems, families, and society as a whole (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). According to the National Center for Health Statistics, Alzheimer’s disease ranks as the sixth leading cause of death in the United States, with nearly 120,000 deaths recorded annually (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). The progressive nature of these conditions means that individuals experience a gradual decline in cognitive abilities, behavioral changes, and eventual complete dependence on caregivers for basic activities of daily living.

 

Understanding the distinction between dementia as a syndrome and Alzheimer’s disease as a specific condition is crucial for healthcare providers, patients, and families. Dementia serves as an umbrella term encompassing various neurodegenerative conditions that share common symptoms of cognitive decline, while Alzheimer’s disease represents a specific pathological process characterized by the accumulation of abnormal proteins in the brain, including amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles composed of tau protein (National Institute on Aging) (2024). The brain changes associated with Alzheimer’s disease begin many years before symptoms become apparent, with researchers now understanding that the disease process may commence decades before clinical manifestation of memory loss and cognitive impairment becomes evident to patients and their families.

 

Types of Dementia

The landscape of dementia encompasses multiple distinct conditions, each with unique underlying pathological processes, risk factors, and clinical presentations. Alzheimer’s disease, while representing the most common form, constitutes just one of several types of dementia that can affect individuals. Vascular dementia represents the second most common type of dementia, accounting for approximately 5% to 10% of all cases and resulting from conditions that damage blood vessels in the brain, such as strokes or atherosclerosis (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). The symptoms of vascular dementia can appear suddenly following a major stroke or develop gradually through a series of minor strokes, with individuals experiencing memory problems, confusion, and difficulty concentrating and completing tasks.

Lewy body dementia represents another significant form of dementia, accounting for approximately 5% to 10% of all dementia cases and involving the buildup of abnormal protein deposits called Lewy bodies in nerve cells throughout the brain (National Institute on Aging) (2024). This condition presents unique challenges as it affects not only memory and thinking but also movement, sleep patterns, and can cause visual hallucinations and delusions.

 

Frontotemporal dementia, while less common, primarily affects the frontal and temporal lobes of the brain and typically manifests at younger ages than Alzheimer’s disease, often impacting personality, behavior, and language abilities more prominently than memory in the early stages.

Mixed dementia has emerged as a critical concept in understanding the complexity of cognitive decline in older adults, with research indicating that approximately 45% of all dementia cases may involve multiple underlying pathological processes occurring simultaneously (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Individuals with mixed dementia may have concurrent Alzheimer’s disease pathology alongside vascular changes, making diagnosis and treatment more complex. The recognition of mixed dementia has important implications for treatment approaches and highlights the need for comprehensive assessment and individualized care planning.

 

Limbic-predominant age-related TDP-43 encephalopathy, known as LATE, represents a recently characterized form of dementia that researchers have identified through post-mortem brain studies (National Institute on Aging) (2024). LATE affects individuals over age 80 and involves abnormal clusters of TDP-43 protein, which is also implicated in frontotemporal dementia but exhibits different patterns of brain changes. Current research suggests that nearly 40% of individuals with an average age at death of 88 years may have had LATE, though diagnostic methods for living individuals remain under development. The identification of LATE underscores the complexity of dementia and the importance of continued research to understand the various pathological processes that can lead to cognitive decline.

 

Risk Factors and Prevention

The development of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias results from complex interactions between genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors, with advancing age representing the strongest known risk factor. The prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease increases dramatically with age, affecting approximately 1% to 3% of individuals aged 60-64 years and rising to 35% among those aged 85 years and older (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Family history significantly influences risk, with individuals having a first-degree relative with Alzheimer’s disease facing a 10% to 30% increased likelihood of developing the condition, and those with two or more siblings with late-onset Alzheimer’s experiencing a three-fold higher risk compared to the general population.

 

Genetic factors play a substantial role in Alzheimer’s disease risk, with the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele representing the most significant known genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer’s disease (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke) (2024). Individuals who inherit one copy of the APOE ε4 allele have an increased chance of developing the disease, while those inheriting two copies face even greater risk and may experience earlier onset of symptoms. The APOE ε4 allele is associated with increased amyloid plaque formation in the brain, though possession of this genetic variant does not guarantee development of Alzheimer’s disease, highlighting the complex interplay between genetic predisposition and other risk factors.

Cardiovascular health factors significantly impact dementia risk, with conditions affecting blood vessels and circulation playing crucial roles in cognitive health. Hypertension has been linked to cognitive decline, stroke, and types of dementia that damage white matter regions of the brain, causing wear and tear to blood vessel walls through arteriosclerosis (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke) (2024). Diabetes, high cholesterol levels, atrial fibrillation, obesity, and lack of exercise represent modifiable vascular risk factors that may accelerate the expression of dementia even in individuals with underlying Alzheimer’s disease pathology. Depression has also emerged as both a risk factor for and potential early symptom of dementia, with studies indicating that individuals with moderate to severe depression symptoms face higher risks of cognitive impairment.

 

Emerging research suggests that nearly 45% of all dementia cases may be prevented or delayed through healthy lifestyle modifications (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Evidence supports the potential protective effects of higher education, regular physical activity, maintaining social connections, and engaging in mentally stimulating activities throughout life. The Mediterranean diet, characterized by high consumption of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, fish, nuts, and olive oil while limiting red meat, has shown promise in reducing dementia risk. Additionally, managing modifiable risk factors such as hearing loss, head trauma, smoking cessation, and maintaining healthy sleep patterns may contribute to dementia prevention strategies. The concept of cognitive reserve, built through education and lifelong learning, may help delay the onset of dementia symptoms even when underlying brain changes are present.

 

Symptoms and Diagnosis

The clinical presentation of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias encompasses a broad spectrum of cognitive, behavioral, and functional changes that typically develop gradually over time. Early symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease commonly include memory loss that disrupts daily life, particularly affecting short-term memory while long-term memories may remain intact initially (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Individuals may experience difficulty handling money, paying bills, or managing financial responsibilities, along with challenges completing familiar tasks at home, work, or during leisure activities. Decreased or poor judgment becomes apparent, and individuals may struggle with planning, problem-solving, and decision-making processes that were previously routine.

 

Language difficulties often emerge as the disease progresses, with individuals experiencing word-finding problems, reduced vocabulary, and eventual inability to engage in meaningful conversation. Visuospatial deficits may manifest as getting lost in familiar places, difficulty interpreting visual information, or problems with spatial relationships. Behavioral and psychological symptoms, collectively known as neuropsychiatric symptoms, commonly accompany dementia and can include apathy, social withdrawal, disinhibition, agitation, psychosis, anxiety, depression, and wandering behaviors (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). These symptoms often prove particularly challenging for caregivers and may necessitate specialized management approaches.

 

The diagnostic process for Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias requires comprehensive evaluation by qualified healthcare professionals, typically involving multiple assessment modalities. Cognitive and neurological testing forms the foundation of diagnosis, evaluating memory, problem-solving abilities, language skills, mathematical capabilities, balance, and sensory function (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Healthcare providers conduct thorough medical and family history reviews, physical examinations to measure vital signs, and laboratory tests to check levels of various chemicals, hormones, and vitamins that might contribute to cognitive symptoms. These assessments help rule out potentially treatable conditions that may mimic dementia symptoms, such as medication side effects, vitamin deficiencies, thyroid hormone imbalances, or infections.

 

Advanced diagnostic technologies have significantly enhanced the ability to detect and confirm Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. Brain imaging techniques, including computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography scans, provide valuable information about brain structure and function while helping rule out other potential causes of cognitive symptoms (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Cerebrospinal fluid testing through lumbar puncture can measure levels of proteins associated with Alzheimer’s disease, providing additional diagnostic information. Revolutionary advances in blood-based biomarker testing now allow many healthcare providers to measure Alzheimer’s-related proteins in blood samples, offering a less invasive and more accessible diagnostic approach. Medicare Part B covers cognitive assessment and care planning services for individuals recently diagnosed with cognitive impairment, facilitating early intervention and support planning (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) (2024).

 

Treatment and Management

Current treatment approaches for Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias focus on managing symptoms, slowing disease progression, and optimizing quality of life for individuals and their families, as no cure currently exists for these conditions. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved several prescription medications that can help manage symptoms or treat the underlying disease process, with most drugs working best for individuals in early or middle stages of Alzheimer’s disease (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Cholinesterase inhibitors, including galantamine, rivastigmine, and donepezil, are prescribed for mild to moderate Alzheimer’s symptoms and work by preventing the breakdown of acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter important for memory and learning.

 

Memantine represents another class of approved medication that works differently from cholinesterase inhibitors by regulating glutamate, an important brain chemical that can lead to brain cell death when produced in excessive amounts. Memantine may help individuals in later stages of the disease maintain abilities such as using the bathroom independently for several additional months, providing meaningful benefits for both patients and caregivers (National Institute on Aging) (2024). The combination of memantine and donepezil has received FDA approval for moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease, and rivastigmine is available in patch form for improved tolerability and compliance.

 

Revolutionary advances in disease-modifying therapies have marked a significant milestone in Alzheimer’s treatment, with the FDA approval of lecanemab in 2023 and donanemab in 2024 representing the first treatments designed to target the underlying disease process rather than just symptoms (National Institute on Aging) (2024). These monoclonal antibodies work by removing amyloid plaques from the brain and have demonstrated modest but statistically significant slowing of cognitive and functional decline in individuals with mild cognitive impairment or early-stage Alzheimer’s disease. However, these treatments require careful patient selection based on biomarker evidence of amyloid accumulation and carry risks of serious side effects, including amyloid-related imaging abnormalities that can cause brain swelling or bleeding.

Behavioral symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease, including sleeplessness, wandering, agitation, anxiety, aggression, restlessness, and depression, require specialized management approaches that prioritize non-pharmacological interventions before considering medications (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Evidence-based non-pharmacological strategies include creating familiar and safe environments, monitoring and addressing personal comfort needs, providing security objects, redirecting attention, removing potentially hazardous items, and avoiding confrontational situations. For sleep disturbances, interventions such as exposure to sunlight, daytime exercise, and establishing consistent bedtime routines can help regulate sleep-wake cycles. When medications become necessary for severe behavioral symptoms, healthcare providers must carefully weigh benefits against risks, as many psychoactive medications can increase confusion, fall risk, and other complications in individuals with dementia.

 

Healthcare Costs and Insurance Coverage

The economic burden of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias represents one of the most significant healthcare challenges facing the United States, with total health and long-term care costs projected to reach $384 billion in 2025 and nearly $1 trillion by 2050 (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). Medicare, the federal health insurance program for Americans aged 65 and older, provides coverage for many medical services related to Alzheimer’s care, though significant limitations exist for long-term custodial care needs that constitute the largest expense for most families affected by dementia. Medicare Part A covers inpatient hospital stays, skilled nursing facility care for up to 100 days following a qualifying hospital stay, and hospice care for individuals with life expectancy of six months or less.

 

Medicare Part B covers physician services, outpatient care, medical equipment, and cognitive assessment services specifically designed for individuals with suspected cognitive impairment or established dementia diagnoses (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) (2024). These cognitive assessment and care planning services help patients and families understand available medical and non-medical treatments, clinical trial opportunities, and community services that can contribute to improved quality of life. Medicare Part B also covers the new amyloid-targeting medications lecanemab and donanemab, provided that prescribing physicians participate in a federal registry system and patients meet specific eligibility criteria including biomarker evidence of amyloid accumulation in the brain.

 

Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage helps offset costs for FDA-approved Alzheimer’s medications and other prescription drugs commonly needed by individuals with dementia. However, beneficiaries remain responsible for deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance amounts that can create financial barriers to accessing necessary treatments (National Council on Aging) (2024). Medicare Advantage plans, offered by private companies approved by Medicare, may provide additional benefits not covered by traditional Medicare, such as dental, vision, and hearing services, though coverage specifics vary significantly by plan and geographic region.

Medicaid plays a crucial role in covering long-term care services for individuals with dementia who meet income and asset eligibility requirements, as Medicare generally does not cover custodial care in nursing homes or community-based settings (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) (2024). Medicaid pays for most nursing home care costs in the United States, with more than 60% of nursing home residents having moderate to severe dementia. Most states offer waiver programs that expand Medicaid coverage to home and community-based services for beneficiaries at risk of requiring nursing home placement, potentially allowing individuals to remain in their homes longer while receiving necessary support services. For individuals eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid, dual coverage can provide comprehensive benefits addressing both medical needs through Medicare and long-term care needs through Medicaid, though navigating these complex systems often requires professional assistance and advocacy.

 

 

Research and Future Directions

The landscape of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias research has experienced unprecedented growth and achievement over the past decade, with federal investment through the National Institutes of Health reaching historic levels to support comprehensive research efforts across prevention, treatment, and care domains. The National Institute on Aging leads federal research efforts and currently supports over 495 active clinical trials investigating diverse therapeutic targets, biomarker development, lifestyle interventions, and care delivery models (National Institute on Aging) (2025). This robust research portfolio reflects a precision medicine approach designed to deliver the right intervention at the right disease stage for each individual, recognizing that dementia likely represents multiple distinct conditions requiring tailored treatment strategies.

 

Breakthrough advances in drug development have accelerated significantly, with at least 25 new drug candidates developed through NIH-funded research programs advancing to human clinical trials as of 2024 (National Institute on Aging) (2025). These investigational treatments target over a dozen different biological pathways implicated in Alzheimer’s disease, including inflammation, metabolic and vascular factors, neurogenesis, synaptic plasticity, APOE-related mechanisms, amyloid and tau biology, neurotransmitters, and growth factors. Five new investigational drug candidates received Investigational New Drug applications in 2024 alone, with 38 additional candidates currently in preclinical development stages. Seventeen of these new drug candidates are being developed as oral medications, while eight represent biologic approaches including immunotherapy and gene therapy.

 

Biomarker research has revolutionized the field’s ability to detect, diagnose, and monitor Alzheimer’s disease progression, with blood-based biomarker tests now available in clinical practice following decades of NIH-supported research and development (National Institute on Aging) (2024). The PrecivityAD blood test, developed with NIH funding and small business support, enables healthcare providers to detect Alzheimer’s-related brain changes through simple blood draws, potentially reducing the time and cost required for clinical trial recruitment and routine diagnostic workups. Advanced brain imaging techniques, including amyloid and tau PET imaging, provide unprecedented insights into disease progression and treatment response, facilitating more precise clinical trial design and individualized treatment approaches.

Lifestyle intervention research continues to yield promising evidence for dementia prevention and risk reduction strategies, with studies investigating exercise programs, cognitive training, dietary modifications, social engagement, and chronic disease management approaches. The SMARRT randomized clinical trial demonstrated that personalized risk-reduction strategies targeting multiple modifiable risk factors can improve cognitive outcomes and reduce dementia risk profiles among older adults (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Music therapy interventions have shown promise for reducing agitation and improving mood in nursing home residents with dementia, while computerized cognitive training programs are being evaluated for their potential to enhance cognitive function in individuals with mild cognitive impairment.

Health equity and diversity in research represent critical priorities for ensuring that advances in dementia research benefit all populations affected by these conditions. NIH-funded researchers are examining biological, social, and environmental factors contributing to higher dementia prevalence in Hispanic Americans and Black Americans compared to White Americans, while developing strategies to improve diagnosis and care access in underserved communities (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Research efforts include investigating culturally appropriate interventions, addressing social determinants of health, and increasing diversity in clinical trial participation to ensure that new treatments are effective across all populations at risk for dementia.

 

Impact on Caregivers and Society

The burden of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias extends far beyond individuals diagnosed with these conditions, profoundly impacting families, caregivers, healthcare systems, and society as a whole. Nearly 12 million Americans provide unpaid care for people with Alzheimer’s or other dementias, contributing an estimated 19 billion hours of care valued at more than $413 billion annually (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). These family caregivers face unique challenges as dementia progresses, including managing complex medication regimens, addressing behavioral symptoms, ensuring safety, coordinating medical care, and making difficult decisions about long-term care placement while coping with their own emotional and physical stress.

 

Research consistently demonstrates that caregivers of individuals with dementia experience higher levels of stress, depression, anxiety, and physical health problems compared to caregivers of older adults with other conditions (National Institute on Aging) (2024). The progressive nature of dementia means that caregiving demands increase over time, often requiring round-the-clock supervision and assistance with basic activities of daily living including eating, bathing, dressing, and toileting. Many caregivers report feeling unprepared for the challenges they face, highlighting the critical need for education, training, and support services designed specifically for dementia caregiving situations.

 

The economic impact of dementia caregiving creates significant financial strain for families, with many caregivers experiencing work-related changes including reduced hours, taking leave, or leaving employment entirely to provide care. Studies indicate that caregivers of people with Alzheimer’s or other dementias are more likely than other caregivers to report high to very high stress levels and face greater challenges accessing appropriate healthcare services for their care recipients (National Institute on Aging) (2024). These challenges are compounded by the complexity of dementia care needs, which often require coordination among multiple healthcare providers, social services agencies, and community organizations.

 

Healthcare system impacts of dementia are substantial and growing, with individuals with Alzheimer’s and related dementias experiencing higher rates of hospitalization, emergency department visits, and skilled nursing facility admissions compared to older adults without cognitive impairment. Medicare beneficiaries with Alzheimer’s or other dementias have more than double the healthcare costs of matched populations without dementia, reflecting increased medical complexity and care coordination needs (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Emergency department visits by adults aged 65 and older with Alzheimer’s disease have increased significantly, often related to complications from other medical conditions, medication management issues, or behavioral symptoms that exceed caregiver capacity to manage safely at home.

 

The development of innovative care delivery models represents a critical area of focus for improving outcomes while managing costs associated with dementia care. Accountable care organizations, Medicare Special Needs Plans designed specifically for individuals with dementia, and programs such as the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly are being evaluated for their effectiveness in coordinating care and reducing preventable hospitalizations (National Institute on Aging) (2024). The Guiding an Improved Dementia Experience model, implemented by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, provides comprehensive support services for individuals with dementia and their caregivers, including care coordination, caregiver education and support, and 24/7 access to healthcare professionals.

 

Societal preparation for the growing prevalence of dementia requires coordinated efforts across healthcare systems, communities, policymakers, and research institutions to ensure adequate infrastructure, workforce capacity, and support services are available to meet increasing needs. The baby boom generation reaching ages of highest dementia risk will strain existing healthcare and long-term care systems unless proactive measures are implemented to expand capacity and improve care quality (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). This includes training healthcare professionals in dementia care, developing age-friendly communities that support individuals with cognitive impairment, expanding access to diagnostic services and evidence-based treatments, and implementing policies that support family caregivers while ensuring adequate funding for research and care services.

 

2. Brain Anatomy and Normal Aging vs. Pathological Changes

The human brain undergoes various morphological and functional changes throughout the aging process, representing a complex interplay between normal physiological adaptations and potential pathological alterations. Normal brain aging is characterized by structural modifications that include cerebral atrophy, changes in gray and white matter volumes, ventricular enlargement, and sulci widening (National Institute on Aging) (2024). How the aging brain affects thinking. The brain’s volume and weight decrease at approximately 5% per decade after age 40, with an accelerated rate of decline occurring after age 70 (National Institute on Aging) (2024). How the aging brain affects thinking. These volumetric changes are not uniform across all brain regions, with frontal and temporal lobes showing the most significant age-related volume reductions. Research conducted using magnetic resonance imaging has demonstrated that increasing age is associated with decreasing volumes of cerebral hemispheres at a rate of 0.23% per year, frontal lobes at 0.55% per year, temporal lobes at 0.28% per year, and the amygdala-hippocampal complex at 0.30% per year (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Normal aging induces changes in the brain and neurodegeneration progress: Review of the structural, biochemical, metabolic, cellular, and molecular changes. Simultaneously, compensatory changes occur as the ventricular system expands, with the third ventricle increasing by 2.8% per year and lateral ventricles by 3.2% per year. The heterogeneity of these changes is particularly noteworthy, as many elderly individuals do not exhibit significant cortical atrophy or ventricular enlargement, indicating that such alterations are not inevitable consequences of advancing age.

 

White matter changes represent another critical component of normal brain aging, with distinct patterns of modification compared to gray matter alterations. The relationship between age and white matter volume follows a different trajectory than gray matter, with white matter volume increasing through childhood and adolescence, reaching peak levels in the fourth decade of life, and remaining relatively stable until approximately age 50-60 before beginning to decline (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2021). Brain morphometry and cognitive performance in normal brain aging: Age- and sex-related structural and functional changes. White matter hyperintensities, which appear as bright signals on magnetic resonance imaging, become increasingly prevalent with age and are associated with advanced brain aging patterns. These hyperintensities represent areas of increased water content and may indicate subtle vascular changes or demyelination processes that occur as part of normal aging. The progression of white matter hyperintensities shows strong correlations with age and has been linked to various frontal lobe functional measurements, though the relationship between these changes and cognitive performance remains complex and multifaceted (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). The brain chart of aging: Machine learning analytics reveals links between brain aging, white matter disease, amyloid burden and cognition in the iSTAGING consortium.

The cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying normal brain aging involve multiple interconnected processes that affect neuronal structure, function, and connectivity. At the neuronal level, aging is associated with morphological changes including dendritic tree regression, alterations in synaptic architecture, and modifications in neuronal membrane properties (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Mechanisms underlying brain aging under normal and pathological conditions. These changes occur without significant neuronal loss in most brain regions during normal aging, as research indicates that neuronal death during healthy aging is relatively minimal, typically no more than 10% in most areas. Instead, the volumetric changes observed in aging brains are primarily attributed to neuronal shrinkage, reduction in synaptic spines, decreased numbers of synapses, and substantial reductions in myelinated axon length, which can decrease by up to 50% in some regions (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Structural brain changes in aging: courses, causes and cognitive consequences. Calcium homeostasis becomes increasingly dysregulated with age, particularly affecting voltage-dependent calcium channels in the hippocampus, where L-type channels increase and contribute to altered long-term potentiation thresholds. This disruption in calcium signaling represents a critical mechanism linking normal aging processes to cognitive changes, as calcium influx is essential for synaptic plasticity and memory formation.

 

Neurotransmitter systems undergo significant modifications during normal aging, contributing to functional changes in cognitive and motor performance. Age-related alterations affect multiple neurotransmitter pathways, including cholinergic, dopaminergic, serotonergic, and noradrenergic systems (Society for Neuroscience) (2019). How the brain changes with age. The cholinergic system, which is crucial for attention and memory processes, shows reduced acetylcholine synthesis and release with advancing age. Dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra exhibit gradual decline, leading to reduced dopamine availability in striatal regions and contributing to changes in motor control and executive function. Gene expression patterns also change significantly with age, affecting stress response mechanisms, DNA repair processes, immune function, and mitochondrial metabolism. These transcriptional changes represent adaptive responses to age-related cellular stress while simultaneously increasing vulnerability to neurodegenerative processes. The accumulation of lipofuscin and neuromelanin pigments within neurons serves as histological markers of the aging process, reflecting decades of cellular metabolic activity and oxidative stress exposure (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Normal aging induces changes in the brain and neurodegeneration progress: Review of the structural, biochemical, metabolic, cellular, and molecular changes.

 

Pathological brain aging differs fundamentally from normal aging through the presence of specific protein aggregates, accelerated neuronal loss, and distinctive patterns of brain atrophy that significantly exceed the changes observed in healthy aging. Alzheimer’s disease, the most common neurodegenerative disorder, is characterized by the pathological accumulation of amyloid-beta plaques and neurofibrillary tau tangles throughout the brain (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Alzheimer’s disease fact sheet. These protein aggregates represent cardinal features of the disease that have been recognized for over a century since Alois Alzheimer’s initial observations in 1906. The amyloid-beta protein, formed from the breakdown of amyloid precursor protein, accumulates between neurons in several molecular forms, with amyloid-beta 42 being particularly toxic. In healthy brains, these proteins are typically cleared by microglial cells and other cellular mechanisms, but in Alzheimer’s disease, clearance systems become overwhelmed or dysfunctional, leading to progressive accumulation (National Institute on Aging) (2024). What happens to the brain in Alzheimer’s disease. The spatial distribution and density of these pathological markers distinguish Alzheimer’s disease from normal aging, as the number and distribution of neurofibrillary tangles extend beyond the limited regions typically affected in normal aging to encompass widespread cortical and subcortical areas.

 

The progression of pathological changes in Alzheimer’s disease follows a predictable anatomical pattern, beginning in the entorhinal cortex and hippocampus before spreading to associative cortical regions and eventually affecting primary sensory and motor areas. This hierarchical progression correlates with the clinical manifestation of symptoms, starting with memory impairment and progressing to global cognitive decline (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Alzheimer disease. Unlike normal aging, where neuronal loss is minimal, Alzheimer’s disease is characterized by substantial neuronal death, particularly in regions critical for memory and executive function. The hippocampus, which serves as a central hub for memory consolidation, shows marked atrophy that far exceeds normal age-related changes. Synaptic loss in Alzheimer’s disease is extensive and correlates more strongly with cognitive decline than plaque or tangle burden, highlighting the importance of connectivity disruption in disease pathogenesis. Inflammation plays a crucial role in Alzheimer’s pathology, with activated microglia and astrocytes surrounding amyloid plaques and contributing to neuronal damage through the release of inflammatory mediators and reactive oxygen species (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2019). The neuropathological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease.

Vascular dementia represents another major category of pathological brain aging, characterized by cognitive decline resulting from cerebrovascular disease and reduced blood flow to brain tissue (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). About Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. This condition encompasses various subtypes, including multi-infarct dementia caused by multiple small strokes, subcortical vascular dementia involving damage to small blood vessels and white matter, and cerebral amyloid angiopathy characterized by amyloid deposits in blood vessel walls. The pathological changes in vascular dementia include microscopic damage to white matter, breakdown of the blood-brain barrier, and disruption of glucose transport to brain tissue. These vascular alterations create a cascade of events including inflammation, oxidative stress, and impaired neuronal metabolism that contribute to cognitive decline. The stepwise progression of symptoms in vascular dementia contrasts with the gradual decline observed in Alzheimer’s disease, reflecting the acute nature of vascular events underlying the pathology (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke) (2024). Dementias.

 

Frontotemporal dementia encompasses a group of neurodegenerative disorders characterized by progressive nerve cell loss in frontal and temporal brain regions, leading to distinct clinical syndromes affecting behavior, language, and executive function (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke) (2024). Dementias. The pathological hallmarks of frontotemporal dementia include abnormal accumulations of tau protein, TDP-43 protein, or FUS protein, depending on the specific subtype. These protein aggregations lead to selective vulnerability of specific neuronal populations and brain regions, resulting in clinical presentations that differ markedly from Alzheimer’s disease. The behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia affects personality and social behavior due to frontal lobe degeneration, while primary progressive aphasia variants impact language function through temporal lobe involvement. The pathological changes in frontotemporal dementia often begin earlier in life compared to Alzheimer’s disease, typically affecting individuals in their 50s and 60s, and the pattern of brain atrophy is more focal and asymmetric than the diffuse changes seen in Alzheimer’s disease (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Types of dementia.

Dementia with Lewy bodies represents a complex neurodegenerative disorder characterized by the accumulation of alpha-synuclein protein aggregates throughout the brain, forming distinctive structures called Lewy bodies (World Health Organization) (2025). Dementia. These pathological inclusions affect both cortical and subcortical regions, leading to a unique constellation of symptoms including cognitive fluctuations, visual hallucinations, and parkinsonian motor features. The distribution of Lewy body pathology differs from other neurodegenerative diseases, with involvement of brainstem nuclei responsible for arousal and attention, limbic structures important for memory and emotion, and neocortical areas crucial for higher cognitive functions. The pathological process in dementia with Lewy bodies involves disruption of normal alpha-synuclein function, leading to synaptic dysfunction, mitochondrial impairment, and eventual neuronal death. The coexistence of Lewy body pathology with Alzheimer’s disease changes is common, representing mixed dementia that complicates both diagnosis and treatment approaches (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Major neurocognitive disorder (dementia).

 

The molecular mechanisms underlying both normal and pathological brain aging involve complex interactions between genetic factors, cellular stress responses, and environmental influences that accumulate over decades of life. DNA damage represents a fundamental mechanism of aging, with both nuclear and mitochondrial genomes experiencing increased damage and reduced repair capacity with advancing age (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Mechanisms underlying brain aging under normal and pathological conditions. The aging brain shows particular vulnerability to DNA damage in gene promoter regions, affecting the expression of genes critical for synaptic plasticity, mitochondrial function, and neuronal survival. This selective pattern of DNA damage appears conserved across species, suggesting evolutionary conservation of aging mechanisms. In pathological aging conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease, DNA damage is significantly more severe and widespread, contributing to accelerated neuronal dysfunction and death. The accumulation of somatic mutations in brain tissue over time may contribute to the increased susceptibility to neurodegenerative diseases observed with advancing age (Nature) (2022). Brain charts for the human lifespan.

 

Mitochondrial dysfunction emerges as a central mechanism linking normal aging to pathological changes in neurodegenerative diseases. Mitochondria serve critical roles in neuronal function, including ATP production, calcium homeostasis, and regulation of apoptotic pathways (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Hallmarks of brain aging: Adaptive and pathological modification by metabolic states. Age-related decline in mitochondrial function involves multiple mechanisms including reduced oxidative phosphorylation efficiency, increased reactive oxygen species production, and impaired mitochondrial quality control through autophagy and mitophagy pathways. The brain’s high energy demands make neurons particularly vulnerable to mitochondrial dysfunction, and the accumulation of damaged mitochondria contributes to synaptic failure and neuronal death. In pathological conditions, mitochondrial dysfunction is amplified through interactions with disease-specific protein aggregates, creating vicious cycles of oxidative stress and cellular damage. Recent research has identified epigenetic mechanisms, including age-related upregulation of chromatin modifying enzymes, that contribute to mitochondrial dysfunction through downregulation of metabolic genes.

Protein homeostasis, or proteostasis, becomes increasingly compromised with age, leading to the accumulation of misfolded and aggregated proteins that characterize neurodegenerative diseases. The cellular protein quality control systems, including the ubiquitin-proteasome system, chaperone networks, and autophagy pathways, show declining efficiency with age (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Normal aging induces changes in the brain and neurodegeneration progress: Review of the structural, biochemical, metabolic, cellular, and molecular changes. This decline in proteostatic capacity creates a permissive environment for protein aggregation and the formation of pathological inclusions such as amyloid plaques, tau tangles, and Lewy bodies. The accumulation of lipofuscin, an age-related pigment consisting of cross-linked proteins and lipids, serves as a marker of impaired protein turnover and lysosomal dysfunction. In pathological aging, the burden of misfolded proteins overwhelms cellular clearance mechanisms, leading to the formation of large protein aggregates that disrupt cellular function and contribute to neuronal death. The prion-like spreading of protein aggregates between neurons represents a key mechanism for disease progression in many neurodegenerative disorders.

 

Neuroinflammation represents a critical mechanism linking normal aging to pathological neurodegeneration, involving activation of resident immune cells in the brain and breakdown of blood-brain barrier integrity. Microglia, the brain’s resident immune cells, undergo phenotypic changes with age that affect their ability to clear cellular debris, including amyloid plaques and damaged neurons (National Institute on Aging) (2024). What happens to the brain in Alzheimer’s disease. Age-related microglial dysfunction involves loss of neuroprotective functions and acquisition of pro-inflammatory characteristics that contribute to chronic neuroinflammation. The concept of “inflammaging” describes the low-grade chronic inflammation that characterizes normal aging and predisposes to age-related diseases. In pathological conditions, neuroinflammation becomes amplified through positive feedback loops involving protein aggregates, damaged neurons, and activated glial cells. Astrocytes, another type of glial cell, also contribute to neuroinflammation while losing their supportive functions for neurons, including glutamate clearance, metabolic support, and blood-brain barrier maintenance (Cleveland Clinic) (2024). Neurodegenerative diseases: What they are & types.

 

The distinction between normal aging and pathological changes has profound implications for clinical practice, requiring sophisticated diagnostic approaches that can differentiate age-appropriate cognitive changes from early signs of neurodegenerative disease. Normal cognitive aging typically involves subtle changes in processing speed, working memory, and executive function while preserving most activities of daily living and the ability to learn new information when given sufficient time (National Institute on Aging) (2024). How the aging brain affects thinking. These changes represent the lower end of the normal distribution of cognitive performance rather than pathological processes. In contrast, pathological aging involves progressive cognitive decline that interferes with independence and daily functioning, often accompanied by behavioral changes, personality alterations, and loss of insight into deficits. The challenge for clinicians lies in identifying individuals at risk for developing dementia while avoiding over-pathologizing normal age-related changes (University of California San Francisco Memory and Aging Center) (2024). Healthy aging versus diagnosis.

Advanced neuroimaging techniques have revolutionized the ability to detect and monitor brain changes associated with aging and neurodegeneration. Structural magnetic resonance imaging can quantify regional brain volumes and detect patterns of atrophy that distinguish normal aging from specific neurodegenerative diseases (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Brain structure ages—A new biomarker for multi-disease classification. The development of brain age prediction models using machine learning approaches allows for quantification of accelerated brain aging that may indicate increased risk for cognitive decline. Functional imaging techniques, including positron emission tomography with specific tracers for amyloid and tau proteins, enable detection of pathological protein accumulation in living individuals, facilitating earlier diagnosis and monitoring of disease progression. These biomarker approaches are increasingly integrated into clinical practice and research settings, offering objective measures to complement clinical assessment and neuropsychological testing (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Brain structure changes over time in normal and mildly impaired aged persons.

 

The emergence of fluid biomarkers, including cerebrospinal fluid and blood-based tests, provides additional tools for detecting early pathological changes associated with neurodegenerative diseases. Cerebrospinal fluid levels of amyloid-beta, tau, and phosphorylated tau proteins reflect brain pathology and can identify individuals at risk for developing Alzheimer’s disease years before clinical symptoms appear (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Alzheimer’s disease fact sheet. Recent advances in blood-based biomarkers, including plasma phosphorylated tau and neurofilament light chain, offer the potential for widespread screening and monitoring of neurodegeneration using minimally invasive procedures. These biomarker developments are transforming the conceptualization of neurodegenerative diseases from clinical syndromes to biological entities defined by underlying pathological processes (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Major neurocognitive disorder (dementia).

The clinical management of aging-related brain changes requires comprehensive approaches that address both normal aging processes and pathological conditions. For normal aging, interventions focus on promoting brain health through lifestyle modifications including regular physical exercise, cognitive stimulation, social engagement, and management of cardiovascular risk factors (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). About Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. Research demonstrates that physical activity can slow age-related cognitive decline and may provide neuroprotective benefits through mechanisms including enhanced neuroplasticity, improved vascular function, and reduced inflammation. Cognitive training and lifelong learning appear to contribute to cognitive reserve, potentially delaying the clinical manifestation of neurodegenerative diseases. For pathological conditions, treatment approaches include pharmacological interventions targeting specific disease mechanisms, non-pharmacological interventions addressing behavioral symptoms, and comprehensive care planning that addresses the progressive nature of neurodegenerative diseases (World Health Organization) (2025). Dementia.

 

The heterogeneity of aging processes necessitates personalized approaches to assessment and intervention that consider individual risk factors, genetic predisposition, and resilience factors. Genetic testing for rare familial forms of neurodegenerative diseases provides definitive risk information for a small subset of individuals, while polygenic risk scores may inform risk assessment for common sporadic forms of disease (National Institute on Aging) (2024). What causes Alzheimer’s disease. The concept of cognitive reserve explains why individuals with similar brain pathology may show different clinical presentations, highlighting the importance of educational attainment, occupational complexity, and social engagement in maintaining cognitive function despite age-related brain changes. The identification of cognitive “super-agers” who maintain exceptional cognitive function despite advanced age provides insights into protective factors and resilience mechanisms that may inform intervention strategies for the broader aging population (National Institute on Aging) (2024). How the aging brain affects thinking.

 

The future of brain aging research lies in developing comprehensive models that integrate multiple levels of analysis, from molecular mechanisms to population-level interventions. Advances in multi-modal neuroimaging, high-throughput genomics, and artificial intelligence are enabling more sophisticated approaches to understanding the complexity of aging processes and their heterogeneity across individuals (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2021). Brain morphometry and cognitive performance in normal brain aging: Age- and sex-related structural and functional changes. The development of precision medicine approaches that can tailor interventions based on individual risk profiles and biological characteristics represents a promising direction for optimizing brain health across the lifespan. Understanding the mechanisms that distinguish successful aging from pathological aging will be crucial for developing effective prevention and treatment strategies for neurodegenerative diseases in an increasingly aging global population.

 

3. Pathophysiology: Amyloid Plaques, Tau Tangles, and Neurodegeneration

The pathophysiology of neurodegenerative diseases involves complex molecular mechanisms centered around abnormal protein aggregation, with amyloid plaques and tau tangles representing the cardinal pathological features of Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders. Amyloid plaques are extracellular accumulations of misfolded amyloid-beta (Aβ) peptides that form through aberrant processing of the amyloid precursor protein, while neurofibrillary tangles consist of intracellular aggregates of hyperphosphorylated tau protein that disrupt normal cellular functions (National Institute on Aging) (2024). What happens to the brain in Alzheimer’s disease. The formation and progression of these pathological structures involve intricate cellular and molecular processes that ultimately lead to synaptic dysfunction, neuronal death, and cognitive decline. The amyloid cascade hypothesis has traditionally posited that amyloid-beta accumulation initiates a pathological cascade leading to tau pathology, inflammation, and neurodegeneration, though recent evidence suggests more complex interactions between these pathogenic mechanisms. Understanding the detailed pathophysiology of protein aggregation and neurodegeneration is crucial for developing effective therapeutic interventions and biomarkers for early disease detection and monitoring progression.

 

Amyloid Plaque Formation and Pathophysiology

Amyloid plaques represent one of the defining neuropathological hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease, consisting primarily of aggregated amyloid-beta peptides that range from 36 to 43 amino acid residues in length, with Aβ42 being particularly prone to aggregation and toxicity (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Alzheimer’s disease: Etiology, neuropathology and pathogenesis. The formation of amyloid plaques begins with the proteolytic processing of the amyloid precursor protein through the amyloidogenic pathway, involving sequential cleavage by β-secretase and γ-secretase enzymes. This processing releases Aβ peptides into the extracellular space, where they undergo a complex aggregation process beginning with monomeric forms that assemble into dimers, oligomers, protofibrils, and ultimately mature fibrils that constitute the core of amyloid plaques. The aggregation process is facilitated by the β-sheet secondary structure of amyloid peptides, which promotes self-assembly through hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic interactions. Familial Alzheimer’s disease mutations in the amyloid precursor protein gene increase either total Aβ production or the ratio of Aβ42 to Aβ40, leading to enhanced aggregation propensity and earlier disease onset (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Amyloidosis in Alzheimer’s disease: Pathogeny, etiology, and related therapeutic directions.

 

The cellular mechanisms underlying amyloid plaque formation involve complex interactions between neurons, glial cells, and the extracellular environment. Recent evidence suggests that plaque formation is not merely a passive extracellular aggregation process but requires the active participation of endocytosis-competent cells, including neurons and microglia (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2010). Mechanism of amyloid plaque formation suggests an intracellular basis of Aβ pathogenicity. Internalized Aβ peptides become sorted to multivesicular bodies where fibril growth occurs, penetrating vesicular membranes and disrupting normal cellular functions. This intracellular accumulation of Aβ precedes extracellular plaque formation and contributes to synaptic dysfunction and cognitive impairment. The process involves template-dependent seeding mechanisms similar to prion propagation, where existing amyloid aggregates serve as nucleation sites for further Aβ deposition. As neurons undergo cell death due to Aβ toxicity, intracellular amyloid structures are released into the extracellular space, contributing to mature plaque formation. The toxic effects of Aβ are mediated primarily by soluble oligomeric species rather than mature fibrils, with oligomers causing membrane permeabilization, calcium dysregulation, and synaptic toxicity through interactions with various cellular receptors including NMDA receptors, PrP, and other synaptic proteins.

 

Amyloid plaques exhibit significant structural and compositional heterogeneity, ranging from diffuse deposits lacking fibrillar organization to dense-core plaques with extensive amyloid fibril networks (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Aβ plaques. Many plaques are surrounded by dystrophic neurites containing accumulated organelles and cytoskeletal proteins, reflecting disrupted axonal transport and neuronal dysfunction. The plaques also attract activated microglia and astrocytes, creating a neuroinflammatory environment that can be both protective and detrimental depending on the stage of disease progression. Microglia attempt to clear amyloid deposits through phagocytosis, but this clearance mechanism becomes overwhelmed in disease states, leading to chronic activation and release of inflammatory mediators. The spatial distribution of amyloid plaques follows predictable patterns, beginning in neocortical regions and spreading to limbic and subcortical areas as disease progresses. Modern imaging techniques using amyloid-binding tracers have revealed that amyloid accumulation begins decades before clinical symptoms appear, suggesting that therapeutic interventions targeting amyloid pathology may need to be initiated during preclinical stages for maximum efficacy.

 

Tau Protein Pathophysiology and Neurofibrillary Tangle Formation

Tau protein, encoded by the microtubule-associated protein tau gene, normally functions to stabilize microtubules and facilitate axonal transport, but undergoes pathological modifications in Alzheimer’s disease and related tauopathies that lead to the formation of neurofibrillary tangles (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2012). Biochemistry and cell biology of tau protein in neurofibrillary degeneration. Under physiological conditions, tau exists as a highly soluble, natively unfolded protein that binds to microtubules through its microtubule-binding repeat domains, of which there are either three or four depending on alternative splicing patterns. The normal adult human brain maintains approximately equal ratios of 3-repeat and 4-repeat tau isoforms, and disruption of this balance contributes to various tauopathies. In pathological states, tau becomes abnormally hyperphosphorylated at multiple serine and threonine residues, particularly at sites recognized by antibodies such as AT8, PHF-1, and others that serve as markers of pathological tau. This hyperphosphorylation reduces tau’s affinity for microtubules, leading to microtubule destabilization and accumulation of unbound tau in the cytoplasm where it becomes available for aggregation into paired helical filaments and neurofibrillary tangles.

 

The molecular mechanisms of tau aggregation involve sequential conformational changes that convert soluble tau monomers into insoluble fibrillar structures characteristic of neurofibrillary tangles (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). The central role of tau in Alzheimer’s disease: From neurofibrillary tangle maturation to the induction of cell death. The aggregation process is facilitated by short hexapeptide motifs within the microtubule-binding domains that adopt β-sheet conformations and promote intermolecular interactions. Tau aggregation can be seeded by small fibrillar structures and propagates through template-dependent mechanisms, allowing pathological tau to spread from cell to cell along anatomically connected pathways. This prion-like spreading mechanism helps explain the stereotypical progression of tau pathology in Alzheimer’s disease, beginning in the transentorhinal cortex and spreading to hippocampal regions and eventually throughout neocortical areas according to Braak staging criteria. The phosphorylation state of tau is regulated by multiple kinases including glycogen synthase kinase-3β, cyclin-dependent kinase 5, and other enzymes, while phosphatases such as protein phosphatase 2A normally maintain tau in a dephosphorylated state. Imbalances in kinase and phosphatase activities contribute to tau hyperphosphorylation and subsequent aggregation.

 

Neurofibrillary tangles exhibit distinct morphological features and developmental stages that correlate with disease progression and neuronal dysfunction. Early-stage tangles, often referred to as pre-tangles, consist of diffuse cytoplasmic accumulations of hyperphosphorylated tau that gradually organize into more structured paired helical filaments approximately 20 nanometers in diameter (National Institute on Aging) (2024). What happens to the brain in Alzheimer’s disease. As tangles mature, they develop characteristic flame-shaped or globose morphologies depending on the neuronal subtype affected, and eventually form dense fibrillar structures that displace normal cellular organelles. The presence of neurofibrillary tangles disrupts multiple cellular functions including axonal transport, synaptic function, and protein synthesis, ultimately leading to neuronal dysfunction and death. When tangle-bearing neurons die, the fibrillar tau structures persist as extracellular “ghost tangles” that can be detected using specific staining methods. The distribution and density of neurofibrillary tangles correlate more closely with cognitive impairment and neuronal loss than amyloid plaque burden, suggesting that tau pathology is more directly related to clinical symptoms. Recent studies have also identified tau pathology in glial cells, including astrocytes and oligodendrocytes, indicating that tau aggregation affects multiple cell types within the central nervous system.

 

Molecular Mechanisms of Neurodegeneration

The process of neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders involves complex, interconnected pathways that ultimately lead to synaptic dysfunction, neuronal death, and brain atrophy. These mechanisms include protein quality control system failures, mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, excitotoxicity, and maladaptive inflammatory responses that together create a toxic cellular environment (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Biochemical and molecular pathways in neurodegenerative diseases: An integrated view. The protein quality control system, comprising molecular chaperones, the ubiquitin-proteasome system, and autophagy-lysosomal pathways, normally maintains cellular proteostasis by ensuring proper protein folding and clearing misfolded or aggregated proteins. In neurodegenerative diseases, this system becomes overwhelmed by the accumulation of amyloid-beta and tau aggregates, leading to further protein misfolding and cellular dysfunction. Heat shock proteins and other molecular chaperones attempt to refold misfolded proteins or target them for degradation, but their capacity becomes insufficient in disease states. The autophagy-lysosomal system, responsible for clearing large protein aggregates and damaged organelles, also shows impaired function in neurodegeneration, contributing to the accumulation of toxic protein species and dysfunctional cellular components.

 

Mitochondrial dysfunction represents a critical mechanism linking normal aging to pathological neurodegeneration, as these organelles are essential for neuronal energy production, calcium homeostasis, and apoptosis regulation (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2018). Converging pathways in neurodegeneration, from genetics to mechanisms. Age-related decline in mitochondrial function involves reduced oxidative phosphorylation efficiency, increased reactive oxygen species production, and impaired mitochondrial quality control through mitophagy pathways. In neurodegenerative diseases, amyloid-beta and tau proteins directly interact with mitochondria, disrupting electron transport chain function and promoting oxidative stress. Calcium dysregulation, particularly affecting voltage-dependent calcium channels and intracellular calcium stores, contributes to excitotoxicity and neuronal death. The accumulation of misfolded proteins within mitochondria impairs their function and triggers apoptotic signaling pathways. Mitochondrial DNA also accumulates damage over time, further compromising organellar function and contributing to the energy deficit characteristic of neurodegenerative diseases. The brain’s high metabolic demands make neurons particularly vulnerable to mitochondrial dysfunction, explaining why neurodegeneration preferentially affects specific neuronal populations with high energy requirements.

 

Neuroinflammation emerges as both a consequence and driver of neurodegeneration, involving activation of microglia, astrocytes, and infiltrating peripheral immune cells that create a chronic inflammatory environment (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Pathophysiology of neurodegenerative diseases: An interplay among axonal transport failure, oxidative stress, and inflammation. Microglia, the brain’s resident immune cells, become activated in response to amyloid plaques, tau aggregates, and neuronal damage, initially attempting to clear pathological proteins through phagocytosis. However, chronic activation leads to a shift toward pro-inflammatory phenotypes that release cytokines, chemokines, and reactive oxygen species that further damage neurons and promote protein aggregation. Astrocytes also undergo reactive changes, losing their normal supportive functions while contributing to inflammatory responses. The blood-brain barrier becomes compromised in neurodegeneration, allowing infiltration of peripheral immune cells and inflammatory mediators that exacerbate central nervous system inflammation. Complement activation, triggered by amyloid deposits and damaged neurons, contributes to synaptic loss and neuronal death. Recent genetic studies have identified numerous inflammatory genes as risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease, highlighting the central role of immune dysfunction in disease pathogenesis.

 

Synaptic Dysfunction and Network Disruption

Synaptic dysfunction represents one of the earliest pathological events in Alzheimer’s disease and closely correlates with cognitive decline, occurring before extensive neuronal loss or mature plaque and tangle formation (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). An insight into cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis of neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s disease. Both amyloid-beta oligomers and tau species directly impair synaptic function through multiple mechanisms including disruption of neurotransmitter release, alteration of synaptic receptor function, and interference with synaptic plasticity mechanisms essential for learning and memory. Amyloid-beta oligomers bind to various synaptic receptors including NMDA receptors, AMPA receptors, and metabotropic glutamate receptors, leading to altered calcium signaling and excitotoxicity. These oligomers also interact with prion protein and other synaptic proteins, triggering downstream signaling cascades that disrupt long-term potentiation and promote long-term depression. Tau pathology contributes to synaptic dysfunction by disrupting axonal transport of synaptic vesicles, organelles, and other essential components required for synaptic function. Hyperphosphorylated tau accumulates at synapses and interferes with synaptic transmission, while tau oligomers can spread trans-synaptically to propagate pathology throughout connected brain circuits.

 

The disruption of neuronal networks in neurodegenerative diseases involves both local synaptic dysfunction and large-scale connectivity changes that affect brain-wide communication patterns (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2013). The cell and molecular biology of neurodegenerative diseases: An overview. Default mode network dysfunction, characterized by altered activity in brain regions active during rest, is one of the earliest detectable changes in Alzheimer’s disease and correlates with amyloid accumulation. As disease progresses, multiple brain networks become affected, including executive control networks, salience networks, and sensorimotor networks, leading to the broad cognitive and functional impairments characteristic of dementia. Protein aggregates spread along anatomically connected pathways, suggesting that neuronal connectivity patterns influence disease progression. The loss of synapses exceeds neuronal loss in early disease stages, indicating that synaptic dysfunction precedes neuronal death and may represent a more reversible target for therapeutic intervention. Recent evidence suggests that restoring normal neuronal network activity through various interventions, including optogenetic stimulation at gamma frequencies, can reduce pathological protein accumulation and improve cognitive function in animal models.

 

Cellular Death Mechanisms and Brain Atrophy

Neuronal death in neurodegenerative diseases involves multiple programmed cell death pathways including apoptosis, necroptosis, and autophagy-related cell death, with the specific mechanisms varying depending on the type and severity of cellular stress (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). Pathology of neurodegenerative diseases. Apoptotic cell death, characterized by DNA fragmentation, cytochrome c release from mitochondria, and caspase activation, is commonly observed in Alzheimer’s disease and other neurodegenerative disorders. The accumulation of amyloid-beta and tau proteins triggers apoptotic signaling through multiple pathways including p53 activation, endoplasmic reticulum stress responses, and mitochondrial dysfunction. Necroptosis, a form of regulated necrosis involving receptor-interacting protein kinases and mixed lineage kinase domain-like protein, has been implicated in neurodegeneration associated with inflammation and protein aggregation. Autophagy-related cell death occurs when autophagy, normally a protective mechanism for clearing damaged proteins and organelles, becomes excessive or dysfunctional, leading to cellular demise. The choice between different cell death pathways depends on the nature and intensity of the cellular insult, with chronic protein aggregation and inflammation promoting apoptotic death while acute excitotoxic injury may trigger necroptosis.

 

The pattern of brain atrophy in neurodegenerative diseases reflects the selective vulnerability of specific neuronal populations and brain regions to pathological processes (Cleveland Clinic) (2017). Alzheimer’s disease: Symptoms & treatment. In Alzheimer’s disease, atrophy typically begins in the medial temporal lobe structures including the hippocampus and entorhinal cortex, regions critical for memory formation and consolidation. As disease progresses, atrophy spreads to association cortices including temporal, parietal, and frontal regions, while primary sensory and motor areas are relatively spared until late stages. The pattern of atrophy correlates with the distribution of neurofibrillary tangles more closely than with amyloid plaques, supporting the concept that tau pathology is more directly related to neuronal dysfunction and death. Modern neuroimaging techniques can detect brain atrophy and metabolic changes years before clinical symptoms appear, providing valuable biomarkers for early disease detection and monitoring therapeutic responses. The rate of brain atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease typically ranges from 2-4% per year in affected regions, significantly exceeding the 0.5-1% annual loss observed in normal aging. Understanding the mechanisms underlying selective neuronal vulnerability may provide insights into developing neuroprotective strategies and identifying early therapeutic targets.

 

Protein Propagation and Disease Progression

The progression of neurodegenerative diseases involves prion-like mechanisms of protein propagation, where misfolded amyloid-beta and tau proteins act as templates to induce conformational changes in normal proteins, leading to the formation and spread of pathological aggregates (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Aβ plaques. This template-dependent seeding process allows pathological proteins to spread from their initial sites of formation to anatomically connected brain regions, explaining the stereotypical patterns of disease progression observed in different neurodegenerative disorders. Amyloid-beta seeds can be transmitted between brain regions and even between organisms under experimental conditions, demonstrating their prion-like properties. These seeds exist in multiple conformational variants or “strains” that may account for the phenotypic diversity observed in different subtypes of Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders. The spreading of tau pathology follows neuroanatomical connections more closely than amyloid pathology, with tau aggregates propagating trans-synaptically from pre-synaptic to post-synaptic neurons. The mechanisms of protein transmission include direct cell-to-cell contact, extracellular vesicle-mediated transport, and tunneling nanotubes that allow direct cytoplasmic connections between cells.

The temporal sequence of pathological events in Alzheimer’s disease suggests that amyloid-beta accumulation precedes widespread tau pathology, though recent evidence indicates more complex interactions between these protein systems (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Is tau in the absence of amyloid on the Alzheimer’s continuum. Primary age-related tauopathy, characterized by tau accumulation in the absence of significant amyloid pathology, is frequently observed in aging individuals and may represent an early stage of the disease continuum rather than a distinct entity. The relationship between amyloid and tau pathology appears to involve bidirectional interactions, with amyloid accelerating tau aggregation and spread, while tau enhances amyloid toxicity through feedback mechanisms. This suggests that therapeutic approaches targeting both protein systems simultaneously may be more effective than strategies focusing on individual pathways. The development of biomarkers that can detect and monitor both amyloid and tau pathology has enabled more precise staging of disease progression and identification of individuals at risk for cognitive decline. Understanding the mechanisms of protein propagation has also opened new therapeutic avenues focused on blocking seeding and spreading processes rather than simply reducing total protein levels.

 

Therapeutic Implications and Future Directions

The complex pathophysiology of amyloid plaques, tau tangles, and neurodegeneration has important implications for therapeutic development and clinical management of neurodegenerative diseases (National Institutes of Health) (2025). Viagra associated with reduced risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Traditional approaches focused on reducing amyloid-beta production or enhancing clearance have shown limited clinical efficacy, leading to increased interest in combination therapies targeting multiple pathological pathways simultaneously. Recent FDA approvals of anti-amyloid antibodies lecanemab and donanemab represent significant advances, though their clinical benefits are modest and limited to early disease stages. These therapies work by targeting different forms of amyloid pathology, with lecanemab preferentially binding to protofibrils and donanemab targeting mature plaques. The limited efficacy of amyloid-targeting therapies has renewed interest in tau-based therapeutics, including small molecule inhibitors of tau aggregation, immunotherapies targeting pathological tau species, and approaches to enhance tau clearance through autophagy or other degradation pathways.

Future therapeutic development will likely focus on multi-target approaches that address the complex, interconnected nature of neurodegenerative pathophysiology (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2021). Role of amyloid-β and tau proteins in Alzheimer’s disease: Confuting the amyloid cascade. These may include combinations of anti-amyloid and anti-tau therapies, neuroprotective agents that support cellular resilience, anti-inflammatory compounds that modulate immune responses, and interventions that enhance protein quality control systems. Early intervention strategies targeting individuals with biomarker evidence of pathology but preserved cognition represent a promising approach, as neuronal damage may be more reversible in preclinical stages. The development of sophisticated biomarker panels combining plasma, cerebrospinal fluid, and imaging markers will enable more precise patient stratification and monitoring of therapeutic responses. Additionally, understanding the mechanisms of selective neuronal vulnerability may lead to targeted neuroprotective strategies that preserve specific cell populations critical for cognitive function. The ultimate goal is to develop personalized medicine approaches that can prevent or significantly delay the onset of clinical symptoms in at-risk individuals while providing effective symptomatic relief for those already affected by neurodegenerative diseases.

 

4. Risk Factors, Genetics, and Prevention Strategies

Alzheimer’s disease represents the most common form of dementia worldwide, affecting an estimated 6.9 million Americans in 2020 with projections indicating this number will nearly double to 14 million by 2060 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2025). The disease is characterized by progressive neurodegeneration caused by neuronal cell death, typically beginning in the entorhinal cortex within the hippocampus and gradually affecting broader brain regions responsible for memory, comprehension, language, attention, reasoning, and judgment (Kumar et al., 2024). While Alzheimer’s disease does not directly cause death, it substantially raises vulnerability to other complications, which can eventually lead to a person’s death, ranking as the seventh leading cause of death in the United States according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data from 2022 (Kumar et al., 2024). The neurodegenerative process manifests through key neuropathological hallmarks including extracellular amyloid-beta plaques and intracellular neurofibrillary tangles composed of aggregated tau protein, which disrupt normal neuronal function and lead to the gradual loss of cognitive abilities and eventually the capacity to carry out daily activities (Kumar et al., 2024).

 

The distinction between familial early-onset and sporadic late-onset forms of Alzheimer’s disease provides crucial insights into the disease’s etiology and genetic contributions. Familial early-onset Alzheimer’s disease, which occurs before age 65, is primarily caused by specific mutations in genes encoding amyloid precursor protein, presenilin 1, and presenilin 2, all essential for amyloid-beta production (Kumar et al., 2024). However, this hereditary form represents only approximately 1% of all Alzheimer’s cases, affecting just a few hundred extended families worldwide (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). The rare deterministic genes that cause familial Alzheimer’s disease include mutations in APP, PSEN1, and PSEN2, which virtually guarantee that anyone who inherits one will develop the disorder, with symptoms usually developing between ages 40 and 60 (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). In contrast, more than 95% of Alzheimer’s cases are sporadic or late-onset Alzheimer’s disease, where the etiology is heavily influenced by environmental and genetic risk factors rather than single gene mutations (Kumar et al., 2024). This distinction has profound implications for understanding risk assessment, genetic counseling, and prevention strategies, as the vast majority of cases result from complex interactions between multiple risk factors rather than predetermined genetic destiny.

The apolipoprotein E gene represents the strongest and most prevalent genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer’s disease, impacting more than half of all cases and demonstrating varying effects across different allelic combinations (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). The APOE gene exists in three common forms: APOE ε2, APOE ε3, and APOE ε4, with each person inheriting one copy from each parent, resulting in six possible combinations (National Institute on Aging, 2024). APOE ε3, the most common allele, is believed to have a neutral effect on disease risk, neither increasing nor decreasing Alzheimer’s susceptibility (National Institute on Aging, 2024). APOE ε2, found in roughly 5% to 10% of people, may provide some protection against the disease, and if Alzheimer’s occurs in individuals with this allele, it usually develops later in life compared to those with APOE ε4 (National Institute on Aging, 2024). Most significantly, APOE ε4 increases risk for Alzheimer’s disease and is associated with an earlier age of disease onset in certain populations, with about 15% to 25% of people carrying one copy and 2% to 5% carrying two copies (National Institute on Aging, 2024). Recent research has provided compelling evidence that individuals carrying two copies of APOE4, termed APOE4 homozygotes, should be considered as having a distinct genetic form of Alzheimer’s disease rather than merely an increased risk factor (National Institutes of Health, 2024). Studies demonstrate that nearly 95% of APOE4 homozygotes develop the biological hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease by age 82, with brain pathology beginning as early as age 55 and symptoms typically appearing around age 65, representing a more predictable disease course similar to other inherited forms (National Institutes of Health, 2024).

 

The mechanistic understanding of how APOE4 increases Alzheimer’s risk has advanced significantly through recent neurobiological research examining lipid metabolism and cellular function. The APOE protein helps carry cholesterol and other types of fat in the bloodstream, and recent studies suggest that problems with brain cells’ ability to process fats may play a key role in Alzheimer’s and related diseases (National Institute on Aging, 2021). Research has demonstrated that APOE4 astrocytes accumulate droplets containing triglycerides with significantly more unsaturated fatty acid chains than normal, and this lipid buildup is much greater in APOE4 astrocytes compared to APOE3 astrocytes (National Institute on Aging, 2021). Genetic screens have identified molecular pathways that could be responsible for these defects, with boosting the activity of pathways that normally produce phospholipids reversing some of the lipid accumulation (National Institute on Aging, 2021). Importantly, supplementing cell cultures with choline, which is needed to synthesize phospholipids, restored normal lipid metabolism in both yeast models and human APOE4 astrocyte cells, providing preliminary support for testing choline supplements in people who carry APOE4 (National Institute on Aging, 2021). The prevalence and risk associated with APOE variants may differ among people of different genetic ancestries, with research suggesting that the degree of risk may be affected by global geographic region from which a person is biologically descended, necessitating more diverse research to better understand how genetic variants affect different populations (National Institute on Aging, 2024).

 

Beyond genetics, a substantial body of evidence has identified numerous modifiable risk factors that collectively account for a significant proportion of Alzheimer’s disease cases worldwide. The 2024 report of the Lancet Commission on dementia prevention, intervention, and care identified 14 modifiable risk factors that, if eliminated, might prevent nearly half of dementia cases globally, adding two new factors to the previously established 12 (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). These risk factors are organized across the life course, with less education representing the primary early-life risk factor, while midlife factors include hearing loss, hypertension, obesity, diabetes, depression, physical inactivity, smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, and traumatic brain injury (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). Later-life risk factors encompass social isolation, air pollution, and the two newly added factors: untreated vision loss and high LDL cholesterol (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). The potential for prevention is substantial, with researchers calculating that modifiable risk factors account for varying percentages of cases among different populations: 33% among Latinos, 29% among Native Hawaiians, 28% among African Americans, 22% among White Americans, and 14% among Japanese Americans in a study of nearly 92,000 participants (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). This life-course approach recognizes that risk factors present years or even decades earlier can influence dementia development, with midlife obesity, hypertension, and high cholesterol representing particular concerns for later-life cognitive health (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024).

Cardiovascular risk factors demonstrate particularly strong associations with Alzheimer’s disease development, reflecting the intimate relationship between vascular health and brain function. Cardiovascular diseases are increasingly recognized as significant and modifiable risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease, both increasing the risk of developing the condition and contributing to dementia caused by strokes or vascular pathology (Kumar et al., 2024). The relationship between vascular health and cognitive function becomes evident through multiple mechanisms, including the brain’s high metabolic demands requiring consistent blood flow and oxygen delivery, making it particularly vulnerable to vascular compromise (Kumar et al., 2024). Hypertension represents one of the most well-established midlife risk factors, with elevated blood pressure during middle age significantly increasing dementia risk later in life through mechanisms involving small vessel disease, microinfarcts, and white matter changes (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). High LDL cholesterol, newly added to the Lancet Commission’s list in 2024, demonstrates the importance of lipid management in brain health, as elevated cholesterol levels can contribute to atherosclerosis affecting cerebral blood vessels and potentially influencing amyloid-beta metabolism (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). Diabetes mellitus represents another crucial cardiovascular-related risk factor, with insulin resistance and glucose dysregulation affecting brain metabolism and potentially accelerating neurodegeneration through multiple pathways including inflammation, oxidative stress, and advanced glycation end products (Kumar et al., 2024).

 

The newly recognized risk factor of untreated vision loss illustrates the complex interconnections between sensory function and cognitive health, demonstrating how seemingly peripheral factors can significantly impact brain function. Vision loss, particularly from conditions such as cataracts and diabetic retinopathy, increases dementia risk through mechanisms involving reduced neural stimulation and decreased social interaction (AARP, 2024). Any primary sensory loss, including vision impairment, negatively affects brain function because neural tissue requires continuous input stimulation to maintain certain connections, and the absence of this stimulation can lead to neuroplasticity changes that may accelerate cognitive decline (AARP, 2024). The Lancet Commission’s report found increased dementia risk specifically associated with cataracts, a clouding of the lens, and diabetic retinopathy, caused when excess sugar damages blood vessels in the retina, but importantly, when these conditions are corrected through appropriate treatment, the associated dementia risk decreases dramatically (AARP, 2024). More than half of people with diabetes develop diabetic retinopathy, representing the leading cause of blindness in working-age adults, highlighting the importance of early detection and treatment not only for vision preservation but also for cognitive protection (AARP, 2024). The mechanism by which vision loss contributes to dementia risk likely involves multiple pathways, including reduced cognitive stimulation from environmental interaction, decreased physical activity due to mobility limitations, increased social isolation from communication difficulties, and potential direct neurological connections between visual processing areas and memory-related brain regions.

 

Hearing loss has emerged as the single biggest modifiable risk factor for dementia according to the Lancet Commission, with mechanisms involving reduced neural stimulation and decreased social interaction contributing to cognitive decline (AARP, 2024). Hearing impairment may impact dementia risk by reducing overall neural stimulation to auditory processing areas of the brain, decreasing social interaction due to communication difficulties, and potentially sharing common underlying causes such as vascular changes affecting both auditory function and cognitive health (AARP, 2024). The protective effect of hearing aid use appears particularly significant, with research demonstrating that hearing aid utilization can be especially effective at protecting cognitive well-being, yet less than one-third of people aged 71 and older with hearing loss actually use hearing aids (AARP, 2024). The relationship between hearing loss and cognitive decline may also involve increased cognitive load, as individuals with hearing impairment must expend additional mental resources to process auditory information, potentially leaving fewer cognitive resources available for other mental tasks such as memory formation and executive function (AARP, 2024). Understanding this relationship has important implications for public health policy and clinical practice, as hearing loss represents a readily identifiable and treatable condition that could potentially prevent a substantial number of dementia cases through appropriate intervention and management.

 

Physical activity and exercise represent among the most well-established and evidence-based interventions for reducing Alzheimer’s disease risk, with extensive research demonstrating protective effects across multiple cognitive domains and neurobiological mechanisms. A meta-analysis including 16 studies with more than 160,000 participants found a 45% reduction in the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease due to regular physical activity practice (Marques-Aleixo et al., 2020). Low levels of physical activity are recognized as a significant risk factor associated with Alzheimer’s disease, with older adults who exercise being more likely to maintain cognitive function throughout aging (Marques-Aleixo et al., 2020). Physical activity was associated with decreased risk of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and vascular dementia even in longer follow-ups of 20 years or more, supporting physical activity as a modifiable protective lifestyle factor that maintains effectiveness over extended periods (Patterson et al., 2022). Recent research has demonstrated that even modest amounts of physical activity can provide substantial cognitive benefits, with engaging in as little as 35 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per week, compared to zero minutes per week, associated with a 41% lower risk of developing dementia over an average four-year follow-up period (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2025). The dose-response relationship shows progressive benefits, with dementia risks being 60% lower in participants engaging in 35 to 69.9 minutes of physical activity per week, 63% lower in the 70 to 139.9 minutes per week category, and 69% lower in the 140 and over minutes per week category (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2025).

The neurobiological mechanisms underlying exercise’s protective effects against Alzheimer’s disease involve multiple pathways including neurotrophin expression, neurogenesis, synaptic plasticity, and inflammation modulation. Physical exercise modulates amyloid-beta turnover, inflammation, synthesis and release of neurotrophins, and promotes structural and functional brain changes that support cognitive health (Marques-Aleixo et al., 2020). Exercise increases levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, a protein crucial for neuronal survival, growth, and synaptic plasticity, particularly in hippocampal regions essential for memory formation and consolidation (Marques-Aleixo et al., 2020). Animal studies have demonstrated that exercise training can reduce amyloid plaque burden, decrease neuroinflammation, improve mitochondrial function, and enhance clearance of toxic proteins from the brain (Marques-Aleixo et al., 2020). The benefits of physical activity extend beyond cognitive protection to include improvements in executive functions, memory performance, and cognitive test scores in individuals with mild cognitive impairment who engaged in aerobic exercise programs (Marques-Aleixo et al., 2020). Aerobic exercise appears to be the most extensively studied form of physical activity for cognitive benefits, with moderate-intensity exercises incorporating high-intensity interval training potentially being more impactful for Alzheimer’s prevention than light exercise alone (Stanford Longevity Center, 2024). However, resistance exercises such as weight lifting also demonstrate benefits, particularly through effects on insulin-like growth factor-1 levels, while activities such as tai chi, Pilates, and yoga provide additional benefits for balance, flexibility, and fall prevention (Alzheimer’s Society, 2024).

 

Dietary interventions, particularly the Mediterranean diet and the Mediterranean-DASH Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay diet, have demonstrated significant associations with reduced Alzheimer’s disease risk and slower cognitive decline through multiple mechanisms involving antioxidant and anti-inflammatory pathways. The Mediterranean diet, characterized by high consumption of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, fish, and olive oil, has been widely recognized for its cardiovascular benefits and demonstrates substantial protective effects against cognitive decline and dementia (Sebastian et al., 2025). Meta-analyses examining adherence to the Mediterranean diet have consistently shown associations with lower risk of cognitive impairment, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease, with the diet’s emphasis on plant-based foods, healthy fats, and limited processed foods providing neuroprotective benefits (Sebastian et al., 2025). The MIND diet, a hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH diets specifically designed for brain health, emphasizes consumption of berries, green leafy vegetables, nuts, beans, whole grains, fish, and olive oil while limiting intake of foods high in saturated fat and sugar (National Institute on Aging, 2024). Research has demonstrated that higher concordance to the MIND diet was associated with a 53% reduction in the rate of Alzheimer’s disease for persons in the highest tertile of MIND scores and a 35% reduction for the middle tertile compared with the lowest tertile, suggesting that even modest adherence may provide substantial benefits (Morris et al., 2015). Brain autopsy studies of approximately 600 older adults who died at an average age of 91 found that people who reported sticking to a Mediterranean or MIND diet showed less evidence of Alzheimer’s pathologies, including tau tangles and amyloid plaques (National Institute on Aging, 2024).

 

The specific components of brain-healthy diets provide targeted neuroprotective effects through multiple biochemical pathways involving antioxidant activity, anti-inflammatory responses, and support for cellular metabolism. Green leafy vegetables, emphasized particularly in the MIND diet, contain high levels of vitamin K, folate, beta-carotene, and lutein, compounds associated with slower cognitive decline and reduced Alzheimer’s pathology in postmortem brain examinations (National Institute on Aging, 2024). Berries, another key component of the MIND diet, contain anthocyanins and other flavonoids that demonstrate anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties, potentially protecting neurons from oxidative stress and supporting synaptic function (National Institute on Aging, 2024). Fish consumption provides omega-3 fatty acids, particularly docosahexaenoic acid, which supports brain structure and function while potentially reducing neuroinflammation and amyloid-beta accumulation (National Institute on Aging, 2024). Olive oil, a cornerstone of Mediterranean-style diets, contains monounsaturated fats and polyphenolic compounds that may protect against oxidative damage and support vascular health, thereby maintaining optimal blood flow to brain tissue (National Institute on Aging, 2024). Nuts and seeds provide vitamin E, healthy fats, and protein that support neuronal membrane integrity and neurotransmitter synthesis (National Institute on Aging, 2024). However, a recent clinical trial of 600 older adults with family history of dementia found that participants who followed the MIND diet had only small improvements in cognition that were similar to those who followed a control diet with mild caloric restriction, indicating that while observational studies strongly support dietary interventions, randomized controlled trials provide more mixed evidence requiring further research to establish optimal dietary recommendations for cognitive protection (National Institute on Aging, 2024).

Social connections and cognitive engagement represent crucial modifiable factors for maintaining cognitive health and reducing dementia risk, with extensive research demonstrating that social isolation and loneliness significantly increase vulnerability to cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease. The 2020 Lancet Commission on dementia prevention estimated that tackling social isolation could prevent 4% of dementia cases worldwide, highlighting the substantial public health impact of addressing social determinants of cognitive health (Livingston et al., 2022). Meta-analyses have consistently shown that good social connections, including living with others, weekly community group engagement, interacting weekly with family and friends, and never feeling lonely, are associated with slower cognitive decline across multiple cognitive domains (Livingston et al., 2022). Being married or in a relationship was associated with slower global cognitive decline compared to being single or never married, while living with others was associated with slower global cognitive, memory, and language decline compared to living alone (Livingston et al., 2022). Weekly engagement in community groups was associated with slower annual memory decline, and monthly or weekly interactions with family and friends were associated with slower memory decline compared to never interacting socially (Livingston et al., 2022). Never feeling lonely was associated with slower annual decline in global cognition and executive function compared to often feeling lonely, with these effects remaining significant even after controlling for other health and demographic factors (Livingston et al., 2022).

The neurobiological mechanisms underlying the relationship between social connections and cognitive health involve complex pathways including stress response systems, neuroplasticity, cognitive reserve, and inflammatory processes. Social isolation increases activity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, leading to elevated cortisol levels that can negatively impact hippocampal structure and function, areas crucial for memory formation and consolidation (Kumar et al., 2018). Animal studies have demonstrated that social isolation reduces cell proliferation and neurogenesis in hippocampal regions while increasing oxidative stress and accelerating accumulation of amyloid-beta plaques and tau tangles (Kumar et al., 2018). Conversely, social engagement promotes release of brain-derived neurotrophic factor and other growth factors that support neuronal survival, synaptic plasticity, and cognitive resilience (Kumar et al., 2018). Social activities often involve cognitive stimulation through conversation, problem-solving, and learning, which may enhance cognitive reserve and provide protection against age-related cognitive decline (National Research Council, 2004). The concept of cognitive reserve suggests that individuals with greater intellectual, social, and physical engagement throughout life develop more robust neural networks that can better withstand pathological changes associated with Alzheimer’s disease (National Research Council, 2004). Recent intervention studies have demonstrated that technology-based social interactions can improve cognitive function, with the Internet-based Conversational Engagement Clinical Trial showing that socially isolated older adults who engaged in semi-structured conversations via webcam four times per week for six months demonstrated nearly 2-point improvements in global cognitive function compared to control groups (Dodge et al., 2024).

 

The integration of multiple prevention strategies through comprehensive lifestyle interventions represents the most promising approach for maximizing Alzheimer’s disease prevention, recognizing that combination approaches may be more effective than single-component interventions. Studies examining multimodal interventions that include changes in diet, physical activity, and cognitive training demonstrate greater benefits than individual interventions alone, suggesting that an integrated approach addressing multiple risk factors simultaneously may optimize prevention potential (Marques-Aleixo et al., 2020). The concept of brain health maintenance throughout the lifespan emphasizes that prevention efforts should begin early and continue throughout life, as the pathological processes of Alzheimer’s disease can begin decades before clinical symptoms appear (National Institute on Aging, 2024). Addressing modifiable risk factors during midlife appears particularly important, as this period represents a critical window when interventions may have the greatest impact on preventing or delaying later-life cognitive decline (Alzheimer’s Association, 2024). The socioeconomic implications of prevention strategies are substantial, with researchers suggesting that those in lower- and middle-income countries or those of lower socioeconomic status were most at risk from the 14 identified modifiable risk factors and thus have the most to gain from interventions addressing them (Alzheimer’s Disease International, 2024). Healthcare providers play a crucial role in implementing prevention strategies through early identification and treatment of modifiable risk factors, patient education about lifestyle modifications, and coordination of comprehensive care approaches that address multiple domains of health simultaneously (Kumar et al., 2024). The development of personalized prevention strategies based on individual risk profiles, including genetic factors such as APOE status, may represent the future of Alzheimer’s prevention, allowing for targeted interventions that maximize benefit while minimizing unnecessary interventions for individuals at lower risk (National Institutes of Health, 2024).

 

5. Clinical Presentation and Stages of Alzheimer’s Disease

Alzheimer’s disease represents a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by specific pathological changes in the brain and a distinctive clinical presentation that evolves through well-defined stages. The clinical manifestation of Alzheimer’s disease begins with subtle cognitive impairments that progressively worsen over time, ultimately leading to severe dementia and complete functional dependence (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). The pathological process underlying Alzheimer’s disease begins decades before clinical symptoms appear, with the accumulation of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in the brain tissue (National Institute on Aging) (2025). The clinical presentation encompasses a spectrum of cognitive, behavioral, and functional changes that can be systematically categorized into distinct stages to guide diagnosis, treatment planning, and prognosis. According to the most recent diagnostic criteria established by the National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer’s Association, the disease is now understood as a continuum that extends from preclinical phases through mild cognitive impairment to dementia (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024).

The pathophysiological changes associated with Alzheimer’s disease begin in the entorhinal cortex, which maintains direct connections to the hippocampus, the brain structure essential for memory formation (National Institute on Aging) (2025). These pathological changes include the abnormal accumulation of amyloid-beta protein that forms extracellular plaques and the hyperphosphorylation of tau protein that creates intracellular neurofibrillary tangles (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). The progression of pathology follows a predictable pattern, initially affecting the hippocampus and subsequently spreading to areas of the cerebral cortex responsible for language, reasoning, sensory processing, and conscious thought (National Institute on Aging) (2025). The accumulation of these pathological proteins leads to neuronal dysfunction, loss of synaptic connections, and ultimately neuronal death, resulting in progressive brain atrophy (National Institute on Aging) (2025). The extent and distribution of these pathological changes correlate with the severity of clinical symptoms and functional impairment observed in patients.

 

Memory impairment represents the most characteristic and earliest clinical manifestation of Alzheimer’s disease, particularly affecting episodic memory or the ability to form new memories and recall recent events (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Patients typically experience difficulty remembering recent conversations, appointments, or events while retaining memory for remote experiences from their earlier life (National Institute on Aging) (2025). This pattern of memory loss, known as the temporal gradient, reflects the preferential involvement of hippocampal structures in the early stages of the disease. Beyond memory impairment, patients develop progressive difficulties with executive function, including problems with planning, organization, decision-making, and judgment (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Language difficulties become apparent as patients struggle to find appropriate words, follow conversations, or understand complex verbal instructions (National Institute on Aging) (2025). Visuospatial impairments manifest as difficulties with navigation, depth perception, and recognition of familiar objects or faces, while attention and concentration deficits become increasingly problematic as the disease progresses (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025).

 

The behavioral and psychological symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease represent significant aspects of the clinical presentation that profoundly impact both patients and caregivers. Apathy, characterized by reduced motivation, emotional blunting, and withdrawal from previously enjoyed activities, often emerges early in the disease course and may be misinterpreted as depression (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Depression occurs in approximately 40-50% of patients with Alzheimer’s disease and may precede cognitive symptoms or develop as a reaction to the diagnosis (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Anxiety and agitation become increasingly common as patients experience confusion and disorientation in familiar environments (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Sleep disturbances, including difficulty falling asleep, frequent awakening, and day-night reversal, represent common behavioral changes that affect the majority of patients with Alzheimer’s disease (National Institute on Aging) (2025). More complex behavioral symptoms, such as paranoid delusions, hallucinations, and aggressive behaviors, typically emerge in the moderate to severe stages of the disease and create significant challenges for caregivers and healthcare providers.

 

The functional decline in Alzheimer’s disease follows a predictable pattern that parallels cognitive deterioration, beginning with impairments in complex instrumental activities of daily living and progressing to basic self-care tasks. Patients initially experience difficulties with financial management, including paying bills, balancing checkbooks, and making appropriate purchasing decisions (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Medication management becomes problematic as patients forget to take prescribed medications or take incorrect dosages (National Institute on Aging) (2025). Driving abilities become compromised due to impaired judgment, delayed reaction times, and spatial disorientation, requiring careful evaluation and often restriction of driving privileges (National Institute on Aging) (2025). As the disease progresses, patients require assistance with meal preparation, household maintenance, and personal hygiene tasks (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). In advanced stages, patients become completely dependent on caregivers for all activities of daily living, including feeding, bathing, dressing, and toileting (National Institute on Aging) (2025).

The Global Deterioration Scale, developed by Reisberg and colleagues, provides a comprehensive framework for staging Alzheimer’s disease through seven distinct phases, ranging from normal cognitive function to severe dementia (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Stage 1 represents normal cognitive function with no subjective or objective evidence of cognitive decline, while Stage 2, termed “very mild cognitive decline,” involves subjective complaints of memory loss without objective cognitive impairment detectable on clinical examination (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Stage 3, characterized as “mild cognitive decline,” marks the beginning of detectable cognitive changes, including difficulty with complex occupational tasks, word-finding problems, and mild impairments in concentration and memory (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Patients in Stage 3 may experience increased anxiety about their cognitive abilities and may begin to avoid challenging mental tasks or social situations that expose their deficits.

Stage 4 of the Global Deterioration Scale represents mild Alzheimer’s disease and marks the point where a clinical diagnosis can typically be established with confidence (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Patients demonstrate clear-cut deficits in multiple cognitive domains, including difficulties with complex mental tasks such as serial subtraction, managing finances, or planning dinner parties (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Memory impairment becomes more pronounced, particularly for recent events, and patients may struggle to recall personal history details or current events (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Mood changes become apparent, with many patients exhibiting withdrawal from challenging situations, flattening of affect, and denial of their cognitive difficulties as a psychological defense mechanism (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). The duration of Stage 4 typically extends approximately two years in otherwise healthy individuals, during which patients can still maintain some independence in basic daily activities while requiring supervision for more complex tasks.

 

Stage 5, classified as moderate Alzheimer’s disease, represents a critical transition point where patients can no longer survive independently without assistance (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Cognitive impairment becomes severe enough to compromise major aspects of daily functioning, including difficulty recalling important personal information such as their current address, telephone number, or the current season (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Patients may become confused about their location and time orientation, although they typically retain knowledge of their own name and the names of close family members (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). The ability to make appropriate judgments about safety and self-care becomes significantly compromised, requiring constant supervision to prevent wandering, falls, or other potentially dangerous situations (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Behavioral symptoms, including suspiciousness, agitation, and paranoid ideation, become more prominent during this stage, particularly in patients who lack adequate supervision and support.

 

Stage 6 of the Global Deterioration Scale encompasses moderately severe Alzheimer’s disease and is characterized by progressive deterioration in basic activities of daily living across five distinct substages (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Substage 6a involves the loss of ability to choose appropriate clothing and dress properly without assistance, with patients often putting clothing on backwards, in incorrect sequence, or struggling with fasteners and sleeves (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Substage 6b marks the inability to bathe independently, requiring assistance with water temperature, soap application, and completion of the bathing process (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Substage 6c involves the loss of toileting independence, with patients experiencing incontinence episodes and requiring assistance with toilet use (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Substage 6d represents the emergence of urinary incontinence, while substage 6e involves the development of fecal incontinence (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). The total duration of Stage 6 typically spans approximately 2.5 years in otherwise healthy individuals, representing a period of substantial functional decline and increased caregiver burden.

 

Stage 7 constitutes the most severe phase of Alzheimer’s disease, characterized by profound cognitive impairment and the loss of basic psychomotor skills (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Patients lose the ability to speak coherently, initially retaining a vocabulary of approximately six words that gradually diminishes to single words and eventually to non-verbal grunting or moaning (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Ambulatory abilities progressively deteriorate, beginning with assistance needed for walking, progressing to the inability to sit independently, and ultimately resulting in complete bedbound status (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). Patients lose the ability to smile, hold their head up independently, and control basic motor functions (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Neurological complications become prominent, including generalized rigidity, primitive reflexes, and difficulty swallowing that predisposes patients to aspiration pneumonia (Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation) (2025). The brain appears to lose its ability to coordinate essential bodily functions, and patients typically die from complications such as pneumonia, sepsis, or other intercurrent illnesses rather than from Alzheimer’s disease directly (National Institute on Aging) (2025).

 

The Clinical Dementia Rating Scale provides an alternative staging system that evaluates functional impairment across six domains: memory, orientation, judgment and problem-solving, community affairs, home and hobbies, and personal care (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2008). Each domain is rated on a five-point scale from 0 (no impairment) to 3 (severe impairment), with the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes score providing more detailed staging information than the global Clinical Dementia Rating score alone (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2008). Research has demonstrated that Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes scores can accurately distinguish between different severity levels of cognitive impairment, with mild Alzheimer’s disease typically corresponding to scores between 4.5 and 9.0, moderate disease spanning scores from 9.5 to 15.5, and severe disease encompassing scores above 15.5 (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2008). This staging system provides enhanced sensitivity for detecting progression within stages and offers improved prognostic information compared to global ratings alone.

 

The Functional Assessment Staging Test represents another widely utilized staging system that focuses specifically on the sequential loss of functional abilities in Alzheimer’s disease (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (1997). This instrument demonstrates strong reliability and validity for staging dementia severity and provides detailed information about the temporal sequence of functional decline (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (1997). The Functional Assessment Staging Test has proven particularly valuable for healthcare planning, caregiver education, and research applications where precise measurement of functional decline is essential (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (1997). The scale demonstrates strong correspondence with neuropathological findings and provides accurate prognostic information about disease progression and survival (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (1997).

 

Current diagnostic criteria established by the National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer’s Association emphasize the integration of clinical assessment with biomarker evidence to improve diagnostic accuracy and enable earlier detection of Alzheimer’s disease (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). The 2024 revised criteria incorporate advances in plasma-based biomarkers, cerebrospinal fluid analysis, and neuroimaging techniques to enhance diagnostic confidence (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Core biomarkers include amyloid positron emission tomography, approved cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, and accurate plasma biomarkers, particularly phosphorylated tau 217, which provide evidence of underlying Alzheimer’s disease pathology (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). These biomarkers enable the identification of Alzheimer’s disease in the preclinical stage, before the onset of clinical symptoms, and support more precise staging throughout the disease continuum (National Institute on Aging) (2025).

The integration of biomarker evidence with clinical assessment has revolutionized the diagnostic approach to Alzheimer’s disease, enabling more confident diagnosis and improved treatment planning (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Blood-based biomarkers represent a particularly promising development, offering less invasive and more accessible testing options compared to cerebrospinal fluid analysis or positron emission tomography imaging (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). However, current guidelines emphasize that biomarker testing should be reserved for symptomatic individuals rather than cognitively unimpaired persons, except in research contexts (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). The clinical implementation of biomarker testing requires careful consideration of regulatory requirements, analytical validation, and clinical utility in diverse populations and healthcare settings (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024).

 

Atypical presentations of Alzheimer’s disease represent important variants that can complicate diagnosis and staging (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). These variants include posterior cortical atrophy, which primarily affects visuospatial processing; primary progressive aphasia, which predominantly impairs language function; and behavioral variant presentations that resemble frontotemporal dementia (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Recognition of these atypical presentations is crucial for accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment planning, as patients with atypical Alzheimer’s disease often experience delayed diagnosis and mismanagement (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). The incorporation of biomarker testing and updated diagnostic criteria has improved the identification of atypical Alzheimer’s disease presentations and enabled more personalized care approaches (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023).

The clinical course of Alzheimer’s disease demonstrates considerable heterogeneity among individuals, with factors such as age at onset, education level, genetic background, and comorbid conditions influencing disease progression (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2021). Early-onset Alzheimer’s disease, occurring before age 65, often presents with more aggressive progression and atypical clinical features compared to late-onset disease (National Institute on Aging) (2025). Cognitive reserve, resulting from higher education, occupational complexity, or social engagement, may delay the clinical manifestation of symptoms despite equivalent neuropathological burden (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2021). Comorbid medical conditions, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and depression, can accelerate cognitive decline and complicate the clinical presentation of Alzheimer’s disease (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025).

 

The assessment of Alzheimer’s disease requires comprehensive evaluation incorporating detailed history-taking, cognitive testing, functional assessment, neurological examination, and appropriate laboratory and imaging studies (National Institute on Aging) (2025). Standardized cognitive assessment instruments, including the Mini-Mental State Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and comprehensive neuropsychological testing, provide objective measures of cognitive impairment and support diagnostic decision-making (National Institute on Aging) (2025). Functional assessment scales, such as the Activities of Daily Living and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scales, quantify the degree of functional impairment and guide care planning (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Neuroimaging studies, including structural magnetic resonance imaging and functional imaging techniques, can identify brain atrophy patterns characteristic of Alzheimer’s disease and exclude other causes of cognitive impairment (National Institute on Aging) (2025).

The clinical presentation of Alzheimer’s disease continues to evolve as our understanding of the disease pathophysiology advances and new diagnostic technologies become available. The recognition of Alzheimer’s disease as a continuum extending from preclinical stages through dementia has important implications for treatment development, clinical trial design, and patient care (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Early identification of individuals at risk for or in the earliest stages of Alzheimer’s disease creates opportunities for preventive interventions and disease-modifying treatments that may slow progression and preserve function (National Institute on Aging) (2025). The integration of clinical assessment with biomarker evidence represents a paradigm shift toward more precise, personalized medicine approaches in Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis and management (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). As our knowledge of Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology continues to expand and new therapeutic targets are identified, the clinical presentation and staging of the disease will undoubtedly continue to evolve, offering new hope for patients and families affected by this devastating condition.

 

6.Diagnostic Criteria, Assessment Tools, and Biomarkers for Alzheimer’s Disease

The diagnostic approach to Alzheimer’s disease has undergone revolutionary changes in recent years, with the development of sophisticated biomarker technologies and updated clinical criteria that enable earlier and more accurate identification of the disease. The 2024 revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer’s disease, published by the Alzheimer’s Association Workgroup, represent a paradigm shift toward a biology-based definition of the disease rather than relying solely on clinical presentation (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). These updated criteria emphasize the central role of biomarkers in establishing a definitive diagnosis while maintaining the importance of clinical assessment and judgment in patient care. The integration of amyloid positron emission tomography, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, and emerging blood-based biomarkers has created unprecedented opportunities for precise diagnosis and staging throughout the disease continuum (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). The criteria define Alzheimer’s disease as a biological process that begins with the appearance of Alzheimer’s disease neuropathologic change while individuals remain asymptomatic, with progression of neuropathological burden leading to the eventual manifestation and progression of clinical symptoms.

 

The foundation of the 2024 diagnostic criteria rests on the concept of Core 1 biomarkers, which represent early-changing indicators that map onto amyloid-beta or Alzheimer’s disease tauopathy pathways and reflect the presence of Alzheimer’s disease neuropathologic change more generally (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Currently recognized Core 1 biomarkers include amyloid positron emission tomography, approved cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers such as amyloid-beta 42/40 ratio, phosphorylated tau 181/amyloid-beta 42 ratio, and total tau/amyloid-beta 42 ratio, as well as accurate plasma assays, particularly phosphorylated tau 217 (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). An abnormal result on any Core 1 biomarker test is considered sufficient to establish a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease and inform clinical decision-making throughout the disease continuum (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). However, the criteria emphasize that not all available Core 1 biomarker tests possess sufficient accuracy for diagnostic purposes, requiring a minimum diagnostic accuracy of 90% or greater with respect to an accepted reference standard in the intended context of use.

 

The evolution of biomarker science has fundamentally transformed the diagnostic landscape for Alzheimer’s disease, with particular advances in blood-based biomarkers representing a major breakthrough in accessibility and scalability of testing (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Plasma phosphorylated tau 217 has emerged as the most promising blood-based biomarker, demonstrating diagnostic accuracy equivalent to approved cerebrospinal fluid assays and amyloid positron emission tomography in numerous validation studies (Nature Medicine) (2024). The development of mass spectrometry-based methods for quantification of amyloid-beta 42/40 ratios in plasma has shown high correlation with cerebrospinal fluid amyloid biomarkers and amyloid positron emission tomography, although the magnitude of change in plasma is more modest than in cerebrospinal fluid (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). Blood-based biomarkers offer significant advantages in terms of cost, accessibility, and patient acceptance compared to cerebrospinal fluid analysis or positron emission tomography imaging, potentially enabling widespread implementation of Alzheimer’s disease biomarker testing in diverse healthcare settings.

 

Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers have established themselves as highly accurate and clinically validated tools for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis, with several fully automated assays receiving approval from the Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory authorities (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). The Elecsys and Lumipulse platforms represent FDA-approved cerebrospinal fluid testing systems that provide standardized, reproducible measurements of key Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers (Journal of the Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease) (2024). When clinically approved high-precision cerebrospinal fluid assays are utilized, the cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-beta 42/40 ratio or amyloid-beta 42/phosphorylated tau ratio can predict the visual classification of amyloid positron emission tomography images with similar accuracy to quantitative assessments of the same positron emission tomography images (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). The concordance between cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and amyloid positron emission tomography is sufficiently high that there is no added diagnostic value to combining both measures for detecting amyloid positivity in most clinical scenarios.

 

Positron emission tomography imaging biomarkers provide direct visualization of Alzheimer’s disease pathology in the living brain, offering unique insights into the distribution and burden of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2021). Amyloid positron emission tomography tracers, including florbetapir, flutemetamol, and florbetaben, have received regulatory approval and demonstrate high accuracy in detecting moderate to frequent neuritic plaques corresponding to intermediate or high Alzheimer’s disease neuropathologic change (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). The introduction of tau positron emission tomography, particularly with the FDA-approved tracer Tauvid (flortaucipir), represents a significant advancement in the ability to visualize tau pathology in vivo (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2021). Tau positron emission tomography demonstrates superior performance compared to amyloid positron emission tomography in predicting cognitive decline and correlates more closely with clinical disease severity and neuronal loss patterns.

 

The appropriate use criteria for amyloid and tau positron emission tomography, updated in 2025 by a joint workgroup of the Alzheimer’s Association and Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, provide evidence-based guidance for clinicians regarding optimal utilization of these imaging biomarkers (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). The criteria identify seventeen clinical scenarios where amyloid or tau positron emission tomography may be considered, with seven scenarios rated as appropriate for amyloid positron emission tomography, two as uncertain, and eight as rarely appropriate (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). For tau positron emission tomography, five scenarios were rated as appropriate, six as uncertain, and six as rarely appropriate, reflecting the more recent introduction and ongoing validation of tau imaging biomarkers (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). The appropriate use criteria emphasize that positron emission tomography biomarkers should be integrated within comprehensive clinical assessments and used to support rather than replace clinical judgment in diagnostic decision-making.

 

Cognitive assessment represents a fundamental component of Alzheimer’s disease evaluation, encompassing both brief screening instruments and comprehensive neuropsychological testing batteries designed to characterize the pattern and severity of cognitive impairment (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment has emerged as a superior screening tool compared to the Mini-Mental State Examination, demonstrating significantly higher sensitivity for detecting mild cognitive impairment and early Alzheimer’s disease (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2019). In the original validation study, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment achieved 90% sensitivity for detecting mild cognitive impairment compared to only 18% sensitivity for the Mini-Mental State Examination using a cutoff score of 26 (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2005). For mild Alzheimer’s disease detection, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment demonstrated 100% sensitivity compared to 78% sensitivity for the Mini-Mental State Examination, establishing its superiority as a cognitive screening instrument.

 

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment evaluates eight cognitive domains including visuospatial and executive function, naming, memory, attention, language, abstract reasoning, delayed recall, and orientation, with a maximum score of 30 points (Medical News Today) (2022). The test incorporates more extensive assessment of executive functions compared to the Mini-Mental State Examination, with five of thirty items sensitive to executive dysfunction compared to only one in the Mini-Mental State Examination (ScienceDirect Topics) (2024). This enhanced coverage of executive function is particularly important for detecting subtle cognitive impairments in conditions such as vascular cognitive impairment and atypical presentations of Alzheimer’s disease (ScienceDirect Topics) (2024). However, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment may have limitations in detecting very mild cognitive decline before obvious subjective concerns arise, and false positive results can occur in cognitively healthy individuals who score below the standard cutoff of 26.

 

Comprehensive neuropsychological assessment provides detailed evaluation of cognitive function across multiple domains and represents the gold standard for characterizing cognitive impairment in Alzheimer’s disease (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). The Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale has been established as the primary cognitive outcome measure required in Food and Drug Administration clinical trials for Alzheimer’s disease treatments and remains widely used in research settings (ScienceDirect Topics) (2024). The original Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale consists of eleven tasks assessing memory, language, praxis, and orientation, with scores ranging from 0 to 70 points, where higher scores indicate greater cognitive impairment (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2014). However, the standard Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale demonstrates limited sensitivity for detecting cognitive changes in individuals with mild cognitive impairment, leading to the development of modified versions that incorporate additional executive function and functional assessment items.

 

The Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Plus represents an enhanced version of the traditional scale that incorporates executive function tasks and functional ability measures to improve responsiveness in mild cognitive impairment populations (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2014). Research has demonstrated that modifications incorporating executive function assessments significantly improve the instrument’s ability to detect cognitive changes over time and predict conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s disease dementia (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2018). Alternative comprehensive assessment batteries, including the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease neuropsychological battery, the Cambridge Cognitive Examination-Revised, and the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, provide validated approaches for detailed cognitive evaluation in research and clinical settings (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017).

The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status represents a brief but comprehensive neuropsychological testing battery that has demonstrated significant correlations with Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers including amyloid positron emission tomography, hippocampal volume, and apolipoprotein E ε4 status (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). The battery consists of twelve subtests that generate five index scores covering immediate memory, visuospatial and constructional abilities, attention, language, and delayed memory, plus a total scale score (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Greater amyloid deposition as measured by positron emission tomography correlates significantly with lower scores on all five indices and eleven of twelve subtests, supporting the clinical validity of this assessment tool for evaluating cognitive function across the Alzheimer’s disease continuum.

 

Functional assessment scales provide crucial information about an individual’s ability to perform activities of daily living and represent essential components of comprehensive Alzheimer’s disease evaluation (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). The Clinical Dementia Rating Scale remains one of the most widely used functional assessment instruments, evaluating six domains of functioning including memory, orientation, judgment and problem-solving, community affairs, home and hobbies, and personal care (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2008). Each domain is rated on a five-point scale from no impairment to severe impairment, with the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes score providing enhanced sensitivity for detecting progression within and between disease stages compared to the global Clinical Dementia Rating score alone (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2008). Research has established that mild Alzheimer’s disease typically corresponds to Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes scores between 4.5 and 9.0, moderate disease spans scores from 9.5 to 15.5, and severe disease encompasses scores above 15.5.

Digital and computerized cognitive assessment technologies represent an emerging area of innovation in Alzheimer’s disease evaluation, offering standardized administration, immediate scoring, and enhanced precision compared to traditional paper-and-pencil tests (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). The Food and Drug Administration has cleared several digital cognitive testing platforms for clinical use, including the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics, Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery, and Cognivue systems (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). These digital platforms provide advantages including elimination of inter-examiner variability, automated data collection and analysis, and the ability to detect subtle changes in cognitive performance that may not be apparent with traditional assessment methods (Creyos Health) (2025). Advanced computerized assessments can generate comprehensive reports based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria for mild and major neurocognitive disorders, facilitating clinical decision-making and treatment planning.

 

The integration of biomarker evidence with clinical assessment represents a fundamental principle underlying current diagnostic approaches to Alzheimer’s disease, emphasizing that biomarker testing should enhance rather than replace comprehensive clinical evaluation (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Clinical judgment remains essential in interpreting biomarker results, particularly given the current limitations of available biomarkers including their reduced sensitivity compared to neuropathological examination for detecting early or mild Alzheimer’s disease neuropathologic change (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). The relationship between biomarker positivity and clinical presentation can be influenced by factors such as cognitive reserve, comorbid pathologies, and individual differences in brain structure and function, requiring careful consideration of the clinical context when interpreting test results (International Working Group) (2024).

 

The International Working Group has proposed alternative diagnostic criteria that emphasize the importance of maintaining a clinical-biological definition of Alzheimer’s disease, requiring both characteristic clinical features and supportive biomarker evidence for diagnosis (International Working Group) (2024). Under this framework, individuals with positive biomarkers but no clinical symptoms are classified as “asymptomatic at risk for Alzheimer’s disease” rather than receiving a diagnosis of preclinical Alzheimer’s disease, reflecting concerns about the psychological and social implications of diagnosing asymptomatic individuals (International Working Group) (2024). This approach distinguishes between individuals who demonstrate typical Alzheimer’s symptoms with positive biomarkers, who receive a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease, and those with positive biomarkers but no symptoms, who are considered at increased risk for future disease development.

 

Blood-based biomarkers have emerged as potentially transformative tools for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis and screening, offering practical advantages that could enable widespread implementation of biomarker testing in diverse clinical settings (Nature Medicine) (2024). Plasma phosphorylated tau 217 has demonstrated exceptional diagnostic performance with accuracies of 90-95% for detecting amyloid positivity and tau pathology, matching or exceeding the performance of clinically used cerebrospinal fluid tests (Nature Medicine) (2024). The measurement of plasma phosphorylated tau 217 using mass spectrometry to determine the percentage of phosphorylated tau 217 relative to non-phosphorylated tau can detect both amyloid and tau positron emission tomography positivity with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve exceeding 0.95 (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). Additional plasma biomarkers under investigation include phosphorylated tau 181, phosphorylated tau 231, neurofilament light chain, and glial fibrillary acidic protein, each offering potential insights into different aspects of Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology.

The clinical implementation of blood-based biomarkers requires careful attention to analytical validation, standardization, and regulatory approval processes to ensure reliable and consistent results across different laboratories and testing platforms (Journal of the Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease) (2024). Current limitations of blood-based biomarkers include the lack of certified reference methods and materials for most assays, potential interference from comorbid medical conditions such as kidney dysfunction or obesity, and the need for validation in diverse populations representing different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds (Practical Neurology) (2024). The Food and Drug Administration has granted Breakthrough Device Designation to multiple blood-based biomarker assays, reflecting recognition of their potential clinical utility and commitment to expediting their development and regulatory approval (Journal of the Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease) (2024).

The AT(N) classification system provides a framework for categorizing individuals based on their biomarker profile for amyloid pathology, tau pathology, and neurodegeneration, enabling more precise characterization of disease stage and prognosis (Practical Neurology) (2024). This system classifies individuals as A+ (amyloid positive) or A- (amyloid negative), T+ (tau positive) or T- (tau negative), and N+ (neurodegeneration positive) or N- (neurodegeneration negative) based on specific biomarker thresholds (Molecular Psychiatry) (2021). The AT(N) framework has proven valuable in research settings for identifying individuals with specific biomarker profiles who may be appropriate for clinical trials and has informed understanding of disease progression patterns across the Alzheimer’s disease continuum (Practical Neurology) (2024). However, the clinical utility of AT(N) classification continues to evolve as new biomarkers are developed and validated, and standardized thresholds for biomarker positivity are established across different testing platforms.

 

Neuroimaging biomarkers beyond amyloid and tau positron emission tomography provide additional insights into brain structure and function that complement molecular biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease assessment (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2022). Structural magnetic resonance imaging enables detection of regional brain atrophy patterns characteristic of Alzheimer’s disease, particularly in medial temporal lobe structures including the hippocampus and entorhinal cortex (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2022). Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography reveals patterns of cerebral hypometabolism that correspond to regions of tau pathology and neuronal dysfunction, providing information about disease severity and progression (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2022). Advanced magnetic resonance imaging techniques, including diffusion tensor imaging, functional magnetic resonance imaging, and arterial spin labeling, offer additional approaches for characterizing brain changes associated with Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology.

 

The role of genetic testing in Alzheimer’s disease assessment focuses primarily on apolipoprotein E genotyping to assess risk for amyloid-related imaging abnormalities in patients being considered for anti-amyloid immunotherapy (Practical Neurology) (2024). Individuals who are apolipoprotein E ε4 homozygotes face substantially higher risk for developing amyloid-related imaging abnormalities during treatment with anti-amyloid antibodies, requiring enhanced monitoring and risk counseling (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). The Food and Drug Administration prescribing information for lecanemab includes recommendations for apolipoprotein E genotyping and counseling around amyloid-related imaging abnormality risk for ε4 homozygotes (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). Genetic testing for autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease mutations in presenilin 1, presenilin 2, or amyloid precursor protein genes may be considered in individuals with early-onset disease or strong family histories suggestive of genetic forms of Alzheimer’s disease.

 

The assessment of behavioral and psychological symptoms represents an important component of comprehensive Alzheimer’s disease evaluation, as these symptoms significantly impact quality of life for patients and caregivers (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). The Neuropsychiatric Inventory provides a validated approach for systematically assessing behavioral and psychological symptoms including delusions, hallucinations, agitation, dysphoria, anxiety, apathy, irritability, euphoria, disinhibition, aberrant motor behavior, sleep disturbances, and appetite changes (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). The Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia offers specialized assessment of depressive symptoms in individuals with cognitive impairment, addressing the challenges of diagnosing depression when cognitive symptoms may overlap with mood-related changes (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). Recognition and management of behavioral and psychological symptoms requires careful assessment to distinguish primary psychiatric conditions from secondary effects of neurodegenerative pathology.

 

Quality assurance and standardization represent critical considerations in the implementation of Alzheimer’s disease biomarker testing, requiring adherence to established protocols for specimen collection, processing, storage, and analysis (Journal of the Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease) (2024). Cerebrospinal fluid biomarker testing requires standardized lumbar puncture procedures, appropriate sample handling to prevent degradation, and analysis using validated assays with established reference ranges (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2015). Positron emission tomography imaging demands rigorous quality control measures including tracer preparation, injection protocols, imaging acquisition parameters, and image analysis methods to ensure reliable and reproducible results (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). Blood-based biomarker testing requires attention to pre-analytical variables such as collection tubes, processing timing, storage conditions, and potential interference from medications or comorbid conditions that could affect biomarker levels.

 

The economic and healthcare system implications of expanded biomarker testing for Alzheimer’s disease require careful consideration of cost-effectiveness, healthcare infrastructure, and workforce training needs (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). Blood-based biomarkers offer potential advantages in terms of cost and accessibility compared to cerebrospinal fluid analysis or positron emission tomography imaging, potentially enabling screening and diagnostic testing in primary care settings (Nature Medicine) (2024). However, implementation of biomarker testing requires substantial investments in laboratory infrastructure, quality assurance systems, and clinician education to ensure appropriate utilization and interpretation of results (Journal of the Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease) (2024). The integration of biomarker testing into clinical workflows necessitates development of standardized protocols for patient selection, test ordering, result interpretation, and follow-up care coordination.

 

Ethical considerations surrounding biomarker testing include issues related to informed consent, disclosure of results, psychological impact of testing, and implications for family members who may share genetic risk factors (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Current guidelines recommend that biomarker testing be reserved for symptomatic individuals rather than cognitively unimpaired persons outside of research contexts, reflecting concerns about the psychological and social implications of identifying asymptomatic individuals with biomarker evidence of Alzheimer’s disease pathology (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). The potential for biomarker results to influence insurance coverage, employment opportunities, and personal relationships requires careful consideration and appropriate counseling for individuals undergoing testing (International Working Group) (2024). Healthcare providers must be prepared to provide comprehensive pre-test and post-test counseling, including discussion of test limitations, implications of positive and negative results, and available interventions and support services.

The landscape of Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis continues to evolve rapidly with advances in biomarker technology, regulatory approvals, and clinical validation studies that will further refine diagnostic approaches (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Ongoing research focuses on developing blood-based biomarkers for neurodegeneration, improving the accuracy and accessibility of existing biomarkers, and establishing optimal algorithms for combining multiple biomarker modalities (Nature Medicine) (2024). The increasing availability of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer’s disease emphasizes the importance of accurate and timely diagnosis to identify appropriate treatment candidates and monitor therapeutic responses (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). Future directions include development of point-of-care testing platforms, integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning approaches for biomarker interpretation, and expansion of biomarker validation studies to include diverse populations and healthcare settings worldwide.

 

7. Current Treatment Options: Medications and Therapeutic Interventions for Alzheimer’s Disease The treatment landscape for Alzheimer’s disease has undergone a revolutionary transformation in recent years, with the emergence of disease-modifying therapies representing a paradigm shift from purely symptomatic management to interventions that address the underlying pathophysiology of the disease. For nearly two decades following the approval of memantine in 2003, no new treatments for Alzheimer’s disease received regulatory approval, creating a significant gap in therapeutic options for patients and families (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). However, the approval of disease-modifying treatments targeting amyloid-beta pathology has ushered in a new era of Alzheimer’s disease therapeutics, offering hope for slowing disease progression in its early stages (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) (2024). The current treatment approach encompasses multiple modalities, including disease-modifying medications, traditional symptomatic therapies, comprehensive non-pharmacological interventions, and emerging therapeutic strategies that target various aspects of Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology.

 

Disease-modifying treatments represent the most significant advancement in Alzheimer’s disease therapeutics, with three anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies receiving Food and Drug Administration approval between 2021 and 2024. Lecanemab, marketed as Leqembi, became the first traditionally approved anti-amyloid treatment following conversion from accelerated approval to full approval in July 2023 based on confirmatory clinical trial evidence demonstrating clinical benefit (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) (2024). The drug works by reducing amyloid plaques that form in the brain, representing a defining pathophysiological feature of Alzheimer’s disease, and is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with early Alzheimer’s disease, including mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia stages (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Lecanemab is administered as an intravenous infusion every two weeks at a dose of 10 milligrams per kilogram of body weight, requiring biomarker confirmation of elevated amyloid-beta through positron emission tomography or cerebrospinal fluid testing before initiation (New England Journal of Medicine) (2023).

 

The clinical efficacy of lecanemab was demonstrated in the CLARITY-AD trial, an 18-month, multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 study involving 1,795 participants with early Alzheimer’s disease and confirmed amyloid pathology (New England Journal of Medicine) (2023). The primary endpoint measured change from baseline on the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes scale, where lecanemab reduced decline by 0.45 points compared to placebo, representing a 27% relative reduction in cognitive and functional decline (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). While participants in both treatment and placebo groups experienced cognitive decline over the 72-week trial period, the divergence between groups suggests meaningful clinical benefit for patients receiving lecanemab therapy (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Secondary endpoints demonstrated consistent benefits across multiple cognitive and functional measures, including the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale and Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living scale.

 

Donanemab, marketed as Kisunla, received Food and Drug Administration approval in July 2024 as the second traditional approval for an anti-amyloid treatment, marking another milestone in Alzheimer’s disease therapeutics (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) (2024). The medication is indicated for adults with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease, including mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia stages, with confirmed amyloid plaque pathology demonstrated through appropriate biomarker testing (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Donanemab is administered as an intravenous infusion every four weeks, representing a less frequent dosing schedule compared to other anti-amyloid treatments, which may offer advantages in terms of patient convenience and healthcare resource utilization (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). The drug targets a specific form of amyloid-beta plaque known as pyroglutamate-modified amyloid-beta, which may provide enhanced selectivity for pathological amyloid deposits while sparing physiological amyloid-beta processing.

The pivotal TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 trial evaluated donanemab in 1,736 participants with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease, demonstrating significant slowing of cognitive and functional decline compared to placebo over 76 weeks of treatment (Alzheimer’s Disease International) (2024). Participants receiving donanemab showed a 35% slowing of decline on the integrated Alzheimer’s Disease Rating Scale and a 39% slowing on the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes scale compared to placebo (Nature Reviews Drug Discovery) (2024). Notably, the trial employed a biomarker-guided approach to treatment duration, with some participants able to discontinue therapy after achieving sustained amyloid plaque clearance, representing a potentially important advancement in personalized treatment approaches (Alzheimer’s Society) (2024). The study also demonstrated that participants with lower baseline tau levels experienced greater clinical benefit, supporting the importance of early intervention in the disease process.

Aducanumab, marketed as Aduhelm, received accelerated Food and Drug Administration approval in June 2021 but was subsequently discontinued by Biogen in January 2024 due to limited clinical uptake and ongoing controversy regarding its clinical benefit (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). The drug was approved based on its ability to reduce amyloid plaques in the brain, which was reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, but confirmatory trials failed to demonstrate consistent evidence of clinical efficacy (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). The aducanumab experience highlighted the challenges of developing effective Alzheimer’s disease treatments and emphasized the importance of demonstrating clear clinical benefit in addition to biomarker effects (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Despite its withdrawal from the market, aducanumab contributed valuable insights into the safety profile and monitoring requirements for anti-amyloid immunotherapies.

 

Anti-amyloid treatments are associated with specific safety considerations, most notably amyloid-related imaging abnormalities, which represent a class effect of these medications (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities include brain swelling and microhemorrhages that can be detected through magnetic resonance imaging and occur more frequently in patients carrying apolipoprotein E ε4 alleles (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). Management protocols require baseline and periodic magnetic resonance imaging monitoring, with specific guidelines for dose modifications or discontinuation based on the severity of imaging findings (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Additional safety considerations include hypersensitivity reactions, infusion-related reactions, and potential interactions with anticoagulant medications, necessitating careful patient selection and monitoring throughout treatment (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) (2024).

Traditional symptomatic treatments for Alzheimer’s disease include cholinesterase inhibitors and the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist memantine, which remain important therapeutic options for managing cognitive and functional symptoms throughout the disease continuum (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). Three cholinesterase inhibitors are currently approved for Alzheimer’s disease treatment: donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine, each with distinct pharmacological properties and safety profiles (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2014). These medications work by inhibiting the breakdown of acetylcholine, an important neurotransmitter associated with memory and learning, thereby enhancing cholinergic neurotransmission in brain regions affected by Alzheimer’s disease pathology (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2006). While cholinesterase inhibitors provide modest symptomatic benefits and do not modify the underlying disease process, they represent established first-line treatments for mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease.

Donepezil, marketed as Aricept, is the most widely prescribed cholinesterase inhibitor and is approved for all stages of Alzheimer’s disease, from mild to severe (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). The medication is initiated at 5 milligrams daily and typically increased to 10 milligrams daily after four to six weeks, with a higher dose formulation of 23 milligrams available for moderate to severe disease (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2006). Donepezil demonstrates selective inhibition of acetylcholinesterase with minimal effects on butyrylcholinesterase, resulting in a favorable safety profile with predominantly gastrointestinal side effects including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and loss of appetite (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2014). The medication has a long half-life allowing once-daily dosing and minimal drug interactions, contributing to its widespread clinical use (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2008).

 

Rivastigmine, available as oral capsules and transdermal patches marketed as Exelon, provides dual inhibition of both acetylcholinesterase and butyrylcholinesterase, potentially offering enhanced therapeutic effects (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2014). The oral formulation is initiated at 1.5 milligrams twice daily and gradually titrated to a target dose of 6 milligrams twice daily over several weeks, while the transdermal patch system provides continuous drug delivery with potentially improved tolerability (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2006). The patch formulation may reduce gastrointestinal side effects compared to oral administration while maintaining therapeutic efficacy, representing an important advantage for patients who cannot tolerate oral cholinesterase inhibitors (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2014). Rivastigmine demonstrates the unique property of sustained cholinesterase inhibition even after long-term treatment, contrasting with other agents that may show diminished effects over time.

 

Galantamine, marketed as Razadyne, combines acetylcholinesterase inhibition with allosteric modulation of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, providing a dual mechanism of action that may enhance therapeutic benefits (Frontiers in Neuroscience) (2019). The medication is initiated at 4 milligrams twice daily and gradually increased to a target dose of 12 milligrams twice daily, with an extended-release formulation available for once-daily dosing (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2006). Clinical studies suggest that galantamine may be particularly effective for treating cognitive symptoms and may also provide benefits for behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2018). Meta-analyses indicate that galantamine demonstrates superior efficacy across multiple outcome measures compared to other cholinesterase inhibitors, though individual patient responses vary significantly (Frontiers in Neuroscience) (2019).

 

Memantine, marketed as Namenda, represents a different therapeutic approach through non-competitive antagonism of N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors, which may become overactivated in Alzheimer’s disease due to excessive glutamate signaling (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). The medication is approved for moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease and is initiated at 5 milligrams daily with gradual titration to a target dose of 20 milligrams daily over several weeks (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2006). Memantine can be used alone or in combination with cholinesterase inhibitors, with combination therapy demonstrating enhanced benefits compared to either medication class alone (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). The drug is generally well-tolerated with side effects including dizziness, headache, constipation, and confusion, and may provide particular benefits for patients with more advanced disease who cannot tolerate cholinesterase inhibitors.

Combination therapy with cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine represents an established treatment approach for moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease, with evidence supporting enhanced efficacy compared to monotherapy (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2018). A fixed-dose combination of donepezil and memantine, marketed as Namzaric, is available for patients requiring both medications, potentially improving medication adherence and simplifying treatment regimens (Alzheimer’s Association) (2025). Clinical studies demonstrate that combination therapy provides greater benefits for cognitive function, activities of daily living, and global clinical impression compared to either medication alone (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). The combination approach is particularly valuable for patients transitioning from mild to moderate disease severity, allowing continuity of cholinesterase inhibitor therapy while adding memantine for additional neuroprotective effects.

Non-pharmacological interventions represent essential components of comprehensive Alzheimer’s disease management, addressing cognitive, functional, behavioral, and psychosocial aspects of the condition (Frontiers in Neurology) (2018). These interventions are generally safe, cost-effective, and can be implemented across all stages of disease severity, making them valuable complements to pharmacological treatments (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2017). The evidence base for non-pharmacological interventions has expanded significantly, with systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrating effectiveness for multiple outcome measures including cognitive function, quality of life, behavioral symptoms, and caregiver burden (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). The multidisciplinary nature of these interventions requires coordination among healthcare professionals including physicians, nurses, occupational therapists, physical therapists, social workers, and psychologists.

Cognitive stimulation therapy represents one of the most well-established non-pharmacological interventions, with strong evidence supporting its effectiveness for maintaining cognitive function and improving quality of life in people with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2017). These programs typically involve structured group activities designed to stimulate memory, attention, language, and executive function through games, puzzles, reminiscence, and social interaction (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Individual cognitive training approaches, including computerized cognitive training programs, have shown promise for specific cognitive domains, though effects may not generalize to overall functional improvement (ScienceDirect) (2016). The optimal intensity, duration, and content of cognitive stimulation programs continue to be areas of active research, with personalized approaches showing increasing promise.

 

Physical exercise interventions demonstrate significant benefits for people with Alzheimer’s disease across multiple outcome measures, including physical function, cognitive performance, and behavioral symptoms (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2025). Structured exercise programs, including aerobic exercise, resistance training, and multimodal approaches, can slow functional decline and reduce neuropsychiatric symptoms in patients with mild to severe Alzheimer’s disease (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2017). Exercise appears to promote neuroplasticity, reduce neuroinflammation, and enhance cerebral blood flow, providing biological mechanisms for its therapeutic effects (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2025). Implementation of exercise programs requires careful assessment of individual capabilities and safety considerations, with supervised programs generally recommended for optimal outcomes and safety monitoring.

 

Occupational therapy interventions focus on optimizing functional performance and maintaining independence in activities of daily living through adaptive strategies, environmental modifications, and caregiver education (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). Evidence-based occupational therapy approaches include training in compensatory techniques, home safety assessments, cognitive rehabilitation strategies, and family education programs (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2017). The person-environment-occupation model guides occupational therapy interventions by addressing the dynamic relationship between individual capabilities, environmental demands, and meaningful activities (Alzheimer’s & Dementia) (2021). Strong evidence supports occupational therapy effectiveness for improving activities of daily living, reducing behavioral symptoms, and enhancing quality of life while also reducing caregiver burden.

 

Behavioral interventions for managing neuropsychiatric symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease emphasize non-pharmacological approaches as first-line treatments before considering psychotropic medications (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). These interventions include environmental modifications, structured activities, music therapy, aromatherapy, and caregiver education programs designed to address agitation, depression, sleep disturbances, and other behavioral challenges (Frontiers in Psychiatry) (2022). Person-centered care approaches that focus on understanding the underlying causes of behavioral symptoms and addressing unmet needs have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing problematic behaviors (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Training programs for caregivers and healthcare staff in behavioral management techniques represent critical components of comprehensive dementia care.

 

Music therapy and creative arts interventions have gained recognition as evidence-based approaches for improving quality of life and reducing behavioral symptoms in people with Alzheimer’s disease (ScienceDirect) (2016). Music therapy interventions may include listening to familiar music, singing, playing instruments, and movement to music, with benefits observed for mood, agitation, and social engagement (Frontiers in Psychiatry) (2022). The neurobiological basis for music therapy effectiveness relates to preserved musical processing abilities and emotional responses even in advanced stages of dementia (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). Individual and group music therapy sessions can be adapted to personal preferences, cultural backgrounds, and disease severity, making them accessible interventions across diverse populations.

 

Emerging therapeutic approaches represent the next generation of Alzheimer’s disease treatments, with numerous novel targets and mechanisms under investigation in clinical trials (Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy) (2024). Anti-tau immunotherapies are among the most promising emerging treatments, with both active and passive immunization strategies targeting various tau epitopes in clinical development (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). These approaches aim to reduce tau pathology, which correlates more closely with cognitive decline than amyloid pathology and may provide more effective disease modification (American Medical Association) (2025). Early-phase clinical trials of tau vaccines and anti-tau antibodies have demonstrated acceptable safety profiles and evidence of target engagement, with larger efficacy trials currently underway.

 

Combination therapies targeting multiple pathways simultaneously represent an important frontier in Alzheimer’s disease treatment development, recognizing the multifactorial nature of the disease (Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy) (2024). Clinical trials are investigating combinations of anti-amyloid and anti-tau therapies, as well as combinations with neuroprotective agents, anti-inflammatory compounds, and metabolic modulators (American Medical Association) (2025). The rationale for combination approaches is based on the complex interplay between amyloid and tau pathology, neuroinflammation, synaptic dysfunction, and other disease mechanisms (Current Therapeutics for Alzheimer’s Disease) (2024). Early-phase studies of dual-target approaches have shown promise, though the optimal timing, sequencing, and dosing of combination therapies remain areas of active investigation.

Prevention trials represent a paradigm shift toward intervening before the onset of clinical symptoms in individuals at high risk for Alzheimer’s disease development (American Medical Association) (2025). These studies target cognitively normal individuals with biomarker evidence of amyloid pathology or genetic risk factors, aiming to prevent or delay the onset of cognitive decline (Journal of Biomedical Science) (2020). Prevention approaches include lifestyle interventions, anti-amyloid treatments, and novel neuroprotective agents administered during the preclinical phase of disease (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2023). The challenge of prevention trials lies in the long duration required to demonstrate clinical benefit and the ethical considerations of treating asymptomatic individuals with investigational therapies.

Precision medicine approaches are increasingly being incorporated into Alzheimer’s disease treatment development, recognizing the heterogeneity of the disease and the potential for personalized therapeutic strategies (Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy) (2024). Biomarker-guided treatment decisions, including amyloid and tau positron emission tomography, cerebrospinal fluid analysis, and genetic testing, enable more targeted patient selection and monitoring approaches (American Medical Association) (2025). Pharmacogenomic considerations, particularly apolipoprotein E genotyping, inform treatment decisions regarding anti-amyloid therapies due to differential risks of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging) (2025). The integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning approaches may further enhance precision medicine capabilities by identifying optimal treatment combinations and predicting individual treatment responses.

Supportive care and caregiver interventions represent essential components of comprehensive Alzheimer’s disease management, addressing the needs of both patients and their families throughout the disease trajectory (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). Caregiver education and training programs provide essential skills for managing daily care challenges, behavioral symptoms, and safety concerns while also addressing caregiver stress and burden (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). These programs typically include information about disease progression, communication strategies, behavioral management techniques, and self-care approaches for caregivers (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). Evidence demonstrates that structured caregiver interventions can delay nursing home placement, reduce behavioral symptoms in patients, and improve caregiver well-being and quality of life.

 

Quality of life interventions focus on maintaining dignity, autonomy, and meaningful engagement for people with Alzheimer’s disease across all stages of the condition (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). These approaches emphasize person-centered care that respects individual preferences, life history, and cultural values while adapting to changing capabilities and needs (Frontiers in Neurology) (2018). Environmental design interventions, including dementia-friendly spaces and assistive technologies, can enhance safety, orientation, and independence while reducing confusion and agitation (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2017). The integration of technology-based interventions, including virtual reality, computerized cognitive training, and monitoring systems, represents an expanding area of supportive care innovation.

Palliative and end-of-life care considerations become increasingly important as Alzheimer’s disease progresses to advanced stages, requiring specialized approaches to comfort care, symptom management, and family support (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Advance care planning discussions should occur early in the disease course while patients retain decision-making capacity, addressing preferences for future care, treatment goals, and end-of-life wishes (American Academy of Family Physicians) (2017). Hospice and palliative care services provide specialized expertise in managing advanced dementia symptoms, including pain, dysphagia, agitation, and respiratory complications (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Family education about the natural progression of advanced Alzheimer’s disease and comfort care approaches helps ensure appropriate care decisions and reduces family distress during end-of-life transitions.

The future of Alzheimer’s disease treatment lies in the continued development of disease-modifying therapies, enhanced diagnostic capabilities, and personalized treatment approaches that address the individual variability in disease presentation and progression (Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy) (2024). The success of anti-amyloid treatments has validated the potential for disease modification while highlighting the importance of early intervention and appropriate patient selection (American Medical Association) (2025). Ongoing research into novel therapeutic targets, including neuroinflammation, synaptic dysfunction, metabolic pathways, and cellular stress responses, may yield additional disease-modifying treatments in the coming years (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2023). The integration of advanced biomarkers, artificial intelligence, and precision medicine approaches will likely enable more sophisticated treatment algorithms that optimize therapeutic outcomes while minimizing adverse effects for individual patients.

 

8. Non-Pharmacological Approaches and Lifestyle Interventions for Alzheimer’s Disease

Non-pharmacological approaches and lifestyle interventions represent critical components of comprehensive Alzheimer’s disease prevention and management strategies, offering potentially modifiable risk factors that may substantially reduce disease risk and slow cognitive decline. Emerging evidence from observational studies and randomized controlled trials suggests that lifestyle factors including diet, physical activity, cognitive engagement, sleep quality, and social interaction significantly impact brain health and may influence the onset and progression of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (National Institutes of Health) (2020). A landmark study funded by the National Institute on Aging demonstrated that individuals who adhered to four or five healthy lifestyle behaviors experienced a 60% lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease compared to those with no or one healthy behavior, highlighting the powerful cumulative effects of multiple lifestyle modifications (National Institutes of Health) (2020). These findings have prompted increased attention to lifestyle medicine approaches that integrate evidence-based interventions targeting modifiable risk factors as primary therapeutic modalities for preventing and treating Alzheimer’s disease.

 

Dietary patterns have emerged as essential factors in cognitive health and brain aging, with specific eating patterns demonstrating associations with reduced Alzheimer’s disease risk and slower rates of cognitive decline in numerous epidemiological studies (National Institute on Aging) (2025). The Mediterranean diet, characterized by high consumption of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, fish, seafood, and unsaturated fats such as olive oil, along with low amounts of red meat, eggs, and sweets, represents one of the most extensively studied dietary approaches for brain health (National Institute on Aging) (2025). Observational studies have consistently demonstrated that adherence to the Mediterranean diet associates with reduced risk of developing mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, and dementia, as well as slower rates of cognitive decline in older adults (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Research examining the brains of approximately 600 older adults who died at an average age of 91 found that those who reported closely following Mediterranean or MIND dietary patterns showed less evidence of Alzheimer’s disease pathologies, including tau tangles and amyloid plaques, compared to those with lower dietary adherence (National Institute on Aging) (2025).

 

The Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension diet, originally developed to manage hypertension through dietary modification, has gained attention for its potential cognitive benefits and associations with reduced Alzheimer’s disease risk (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). The DASH diet emphasizes fruits, vegetables, whole grains, lean proteins, and low-fat dairy products while limiting saturated fats, cholesterol, and sodium, creating an eating pattern that promotes cardiovascular health and may protect against cognitive decline through improved vascular function (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Studies examining the relationship between DASH diet adherence and cognitive outcomes have found that strict adherence associates with lower risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease and better cognitive function in older adults (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Research combining the DASH diet with exercise and behavioral weight management programs has demonstrated improvements in executive function among sedentary and obese individuals, suggesting that dietary interventions may provide enhanced benefits when integrated with other lifestyle modifications.

 

The Mediterranean-DASH Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay diet represents a hybrid dietary pattern specifically designed to target dementia prevention by combining elements of both Mediterranean and DASH diets while emphasizing foods with established neuroprotective properties (National Institutes of Health) (2020). The MIND diet specifically emphasizes green leafy vegetables, other vegetables, nuts, berries, beans, whole grains, fish, poultry, olive oil, and wine, while limiting red meats, butter, cheese, pastries, sweets, and fried foods (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). Observational studies of more than 900 dementia-free older adults found that closely following the MIND diet associated with reduced risk of Alzheimer’s disease and slower rates of cognitive decline, with benefits observed even among individuals with moderate rather than strict adherence (National Institute on Aging) (2025). The National Institute on Aging is currently funding the MIND Diet Intervention to Prevent Alzheimer’s Disease clinical trial, a randomized controlled study comparing parallel groups following different dietary patterns to directly test whether the MIND diet can protect cognitive function in older adults (National Institutes of Health) (2020).

 

The biological mechanisms through which dietary patterns may influence Alzheimer’s disease risk involve multiple pathways including modulation of oxidative stress, inflammation, insulin sensitivity, vascular health, and gut microbiome composition (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). Specific nutrients emphasized in brain-healthy dietary patterns, including omega-3 fatty acids, polyphenols, antioxidants, and B vitamins, demonstrate anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties that may protect neural tissue from age-related damage (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). The Mediterranean and MIND diets’ emphasis on plant-based foods provides abundant polyphenols and antioxidants that may reduce oxidative stress and inflammation, two processes implicated in Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis (National Institute on Aging) (2025). Additionally, these dietary patterns support cardiovascular health through improved lipid profiles, blood pressure control, and endothelial function, potentially reducing vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia.

 

Physical activity and structured exercise represent among the most potent lifestyle interventions for promoting brain health, maintaining cognitive function, and potentially reducing Alzheimer’s disease risk throughout the lifespan (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses consistently demonstrates that regular physical activity associates with reduced risk of cognitive decline and dementia, with sedentary lifestyles conversely increasing Alzheimer’s disease risk (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). The U.S. Study to Protect Brain Health Through Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Risk, known as U.S. POINTER, represents a major multisite randomized clinical trial designed to evaluate whether lifestyle interventions including physical activity may protect cognitive function in older adults at increased risk for cognitive decline (National Institutes of Health) (2020). The National Institute on Aging recommends at least 150 minutes per week of moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity as one of five key healthy lifestyle factors that may substantially reduce Alzheimer’s disease risk (National Institutes of Health) (2020).

The neurobiological mechanisms underlying physical activity’s cognitive benefits involve multiple pathways including enhanced cerebral blood flow, increased production of neurotrophic factors, promotion of neurogenesis, reduction of neuroinflammation, and improvement of neurotransmitter regulation (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Exercise stimulates production of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, a critical protein supporting neuronal survival, growth, and synaptic plasticity in brain regions essential for learning and memory (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Physical activity also promotes vascularization of brain tissue, improving oxygen and nutrient delivery while facilitating removal of metabolic waste products including amyloid-beta and tau proteins through enhanced glymphatic system function (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2023). Aerobic exercise specifically has demonstrated capacity to increase hippocampal volume and improve memory performance in older adults, directly counteracting age-related hippocampal atrophy associated with cognitive decline.

 

Different exercise modalities offer distinct cognitive benefits, with aerobic exercise, resistance training, and multimodal programs each demonstrating effectiveness for various aspects of cognitive function and brain health (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Aerobic activities such as walking, swimming, cycling, and dancing promote cardiovascular fitness and cerebral blood flow, demonstrating particular benefits for executive function and processing speed (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2023). Resistance training exercises targeting muscle strength and endurance have shown benefits for executive function, attention, and memory, potentially through mechanisms involving improved insulin sensitivity and reduced systemic inflammation (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Multimodal exercise programs combining aerobic exercise, strength training, balance activities, and flexibility work provide comprehensive benefits for physical function, cognitive performance, and reduction of behavioral symptoms in individuals with mild to severe Alzheimer’s disease.

Sleep quality and adequate sleep duration represent critical but often overlooked factors in brain health and Alzheimer’s disease risk, with mounting evidence implicating sleep disturbances as significant contributors to cognitive decline and neurodegeneration (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2015). Multiple meta-analyses have demonstrated that individuals with sleep problems experience significantly elevated risk for cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease, with approximately 15% of Alzheimer’s disease cases in the population potentially attributable to sleep disturbances (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). A comprehensive meta-analysis examining 27 observational studies with over 69,000 participants found that individuals with sleep problems had 1.55 times higher risk of Alzheimer’s disease, 1.65 times higher risk of cognitive impairment, and 3.78 times higher risk of preclinical Alzheimer’s disease compared to individuals without sleep problems (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2017). These findings underscore sleep as a potentially modifiable risk factor deserving increased attention in Alzheimer’s disease prevention and management strategies.

 

The relationship between sleep and Alzheimer’s disease pathology involves bidirectional interactions, with sleep disturbances both resulting from and potentially contributing to disease progression through effects on amyloid-beta and tau protein clearance (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2015). During sleep, particularly slow-wave sleep, the brain’s glymphatic system demonstrates enhanced activity, facilitating clearance of metabolic waste products including amyloid-beta and tau proteins that accumulate in Alzheimer’s disease (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2015). Experimental studies have demonstrated that sleep deprivation alters cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-beta dynamics, increasing amyloid-beta production and reducing its clearance, potentially accelerating amyloid plaque formation (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2015). Recent research has identified associations between sleep parameters and measures of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, including cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and positron emission tomography measures of amyloid-beta deposition, even among cognitively unimpaired individuals.

 

Specific sleep characteristics associated with increased dementia risk include sleep fragmentation, reduced sleep efficiency, decreased rapid eye movement sleep, increased light sleep, short or long sleep duration, and sleep-disordered breathing conditions such as obstructive sleep apnea (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Longitudinal studies have identified sleep fragmentation and reduced sleep efficiency as particularly robust predictors of cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease development (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Dose-response analyses have revealed nonlinear associations between sleep duration and cognitive outcomes, with both short sleep duration (less than 6 hours) and long sleep duration (greater than 9 hours) associating with increased risk of cognitive disorders and Alzheimer’s disease (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2020). Sleep-disordered breathing, particularly obstructive sleep apnea, represents a significant modifiable risk factor, with emerging evidence supporting continuous positive airway pressure treatment as a potential intervention to reduce dementia risk in affected individuals (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2025).

 

Cognitive engagement and intellectually stimulating activities represent important lifestyle factors for maintaining cognitive reserve and potentially reducing Alzheimer’s disease risk throughout the lifespan (National Institutes of Health) (2020). The concept of cognitive reserve refers to the brain’s capacity to maintain function despite accumulating neuropathology, with higher cognitive reserve potentially delaying clinical manifestation of Alzheimer’s disease symptoms (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). Engagement in late-life cognitive activities including reading, playing games, pursuing hobbies, learning new skills, and social interaction represents one of five key healthy lifestyle factors associated with substantially reduced Alzheimer’s disease risk in National Institute on Aging-funded research (National Institutes of Health) (2020). Cognitive stimulation programs and structured cognitive training interventions have demonstrated benefits for maintaining cognitive function and improving quality of life in individuals with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease, though effects on functional status and mood remain less consistently documented.

 

Social engagement and maintenance of strong social connections represent additional lifestyle factors demonstrating associations with cognitive health and reduced dementia risk in epidemiological studies (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Social isolation and loneliness have emerged as significant risk factors for cognitive decline, with a Lancet commission on dementia prevention identifying social isolation as one of twelve potentially modifiable risk factors collectively accounting for approximately 40% of global dementia burden (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2024). Mechanisms linking social engagement to cognitive health may involve multiple pathways including enhanced cognitive stimulation through social interactions, reduced stress and depression, maintenance of purpose and meaning, and promotion of healthy behaviors through social support networks (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Interventions promoting social connection and community engagement may provide cognitive benefits while simultaneously addressing other risk factors such as depression, physical inactivity, and poor health behaviors.

 

Cardiovascular health and management of vascular risk factors represent critical components of Alzheimer’s disease prevention strategies, with substantial evidence linking cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia to increased dementia risk (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). The principle that “what’s good for the heart is good for the brain” reflects recognition that vascular health fundamentally influences brain function and Alzheimer’s disease risk throughout life (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). Hypertension in midlife particularly associates with increased dementia risk in later life, while treatment of high blood pressure with medication and healthy lifestyle changes including exercise and smoking cessation may help reduce dementia risk (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). Type 2 diabetes represents another significant modifiable risk factor, with dietary patterns and lifestyle interventions that reduce diabetes risk potentially conferring neuroprotection through improved insulin sensitivity, reduced inflammation, and better glucose metabolism (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023).

Multidomain lifestyle interventions combining multiple evidence-based approaches represent the most promising strategy for maximizing cognitive benefits and potentially preventing or delaying Alzheimer’s disease (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2024). The rationale for multidomain approaches recognizes the multifactorial etiology and heterogeneity of Alzheimer’s disease, suggesting that interventions targeting multiple pathways simultaneously may prove more effective than single-domain interventions (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2024). The Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study, known as FINGER, demonstrated that a two-year multimodal intervention including diet, exercise, cognitive training, and vascular risk monitoring maintained cognitive function in older adults at increased risk of dementia, with global cognition scores 25% higher in the intervention group compared to controls after 24 months (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2024). This landmark trial established proof-of-concept for multidomain lifestyle interventions and stimulated development of similar trials worldwide.

 

A recently published randomized controlled trial examining effects of intensive lifestyle changes on progression of mild cognitive impairment or early dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease demonstrated that comprehensive lifestyle interventions may significantly improve cognition and function after 20 weeks (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2024). The trial enrolled 51 participants aged 45-90 with mild cognitive impairment or early dementia and randomized them to either intensive multidomain lifestyle intervention or usual care control, with primary outcomes including Clinical Global Impression of Change, Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale, and Clinical Dementia Rating scales (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2024). The intervention group demonstrated significant improvements across multiple cognitive and functional measures compared to controls, with beneficial changes also observed in gut microbiome composition, suggesting that comprehensive lifestyle modifications may benefit patients even after cognitive symptoms emerge (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2024). These findings support the concept that more intensive multimodal lifestyle interventions may prove more efficacious than moderate interventions for preventing and managing dementia.

Stress management and psychological well-being represent important though less extensively studied lifestyle factors with potential relevance to Alzheimer’s disease risk and cognitive health (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Chronic stress and elevated cortisol levels have been implicated in hippocampal atrophy, cognitive dysfunction, and potentially increased risk of cognitive decline, though the specific relationships between stress, stress management interventions, and Alzheimer’s disease require further investigation (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Mind-body interventions including meditation, mindfulness practices, yoga, and tai chi demonstrate benefits for stress reduction, mood, and potentially cognitive function, with some evidence suggesting these practices may reduce inflammation and support neuroplasticity (Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience) (2023). Integration of stress management and mindfulness approaches within comprehensive lifestyle medicine frameworks represents a promising direction for future research and clinical practice.

Environmental modifications and supportive living environments play crucial roles in optimizing function, safety, and quality of life for individuals with Alzheimer’s disease across all stages of the condition (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). Person-centered environmental design principles emphasize creating spaces that support orientation, reduce confusion, promote independence, and accommodate changing capabilities as disease progresses (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). Specific environmental strategies include optimizing lighting to reduce shadows and improve visibility, minimizing clutter and excessive stimulation, providing clear visual cues and signage, ensuring safe floor surfaces to prevent falls, and creating designated spaces for specific activities (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). Technology-based interventions including monitoring systems, medication reminders, GPS tracking devices, and assistive technologies can enhance safety while promoting independence, though careful consideration must be given to privacy, dignity, and individual preferences in implementing these solutions.

 

Alcohol consumption represents a complex lifestyle factor with nuanced relationships to Alzheimer’s disease risk depending on consumption patterns and quantities (National Institutes of Health) (2020). The National Institute on Aging-funded research on healthy lifestyle behaviors included light-to-moderate alcohol consumption as one of five factors associated with reduced Alzheimer’s disease risk, though this finding requires careful interpretation given potential risks of alcohol use (National Institutes of Health) (2020). Observational studies have suggested J-shaped or U-shaped relationships between alcohol consumption and dementia risk, with light-to-moderate consumption sometimes associating with reduced risk compared to both abstinence and heavy consumption, potentially through cardiovascular and anti-inflammatory mechanisms (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). However, heavy alcohol consumption clearly increases dementia risk and causes direct neurotoxic effects, and any potential benefits of light-to-moderate alcohol consumption must be carefully weighed against risks of alcohol-related harms, addiction, and other health consequences.

 

Smoking cessation represents an unequivocally beneficial lifestyle modification for brain health and Alzheimer’s disease risk reduction, with smoking recognized as a modifiable risk factor for cognitive decline and dementia (National Institutes of Health) (2020). Research has confirmed that even in individuals aged 60 or older who have been smoking for decades, quitting improves health outcomes and may reduce dementia risk (National Institutes of Health) (2020). Smoking contributes to cognitive decline through multiple mechanisms including cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular damage, increased oxidative stress and inflammation, and direct neurotoxic effects of tobacco constituents (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). Healthcare providers should strongly encourage smoking cessation for all individuals and provide access to evidence-based cessation interventions including counseling, pharmacotherapy, and behavioral support to maximize quit success rates.

 

Clinical implementation of lifestyle interventions for Alzheimer’s disease prevention and management requires systematic approaches to assessment, goal-setting, intervention delivery, and monitoring that account for individual capabilities, preferences, resources, and cultural contexts (American Occupational Therapy Association) (2024). Successful implementation begins with comprehensive assessment of current lifestyle behaviors, identification of modifiable risk factors, evaluation of readiness to change, and collaborative establishment of realistic, personalized goals (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Healthcare providers should employ motivational interviewing techniques, shared decision-making approaches, and patient-centered counseling to engage individuals and families in lifestyle modification efforts while respecting autonomy and individual circumstances (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). Regular monitoring, ongoing support, and periodic goal adjustment help maintain adherence and optimize long-term success of lifestyle interventions.

 

Barriers to implementation of lifestyle interventions include limited awareness among healthcare providers and patients, lack of reimbursement for preventive services, insufficient time during clinical encounters, limited access to supportive resources and programs, and socioeconomic disparities affecting capacity to adopt healthy lifestyles (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). Addressing these barriers requires multi-level approaches including healthcare provider education, policy changes to support preventive care reimbursement, development of accessible community-based programs, and targeted interventions addressing health equity and social determinants of health (Alzheimers.gov) (2025). Healthcare systems should develop infrastructure supporting lifestyle medicine approaches including trained personnel, standardized assessment tools, referral pathways to community resources, and care coordination mechanisms to facilitate successful implementation of comprehensive lifestyle interventions.

 

Future research directions include large-scale randomized controlled trials testing effects of multidomain lifestyle interventions on Alzheimer’s disease incidence and progression, identification of optimal intervention components and dosing, investigation of mechanisms underlying lifestyle effects on brain health, examination of critical periods across the lifespan for intervention, and development of personalized approaches accounting for genetic and biomarker profiles (Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy) (2024). The National Institute on Aging currently funds more than 230 active clinical trials on Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, with over 100 focused specifically on non-drug interventions including exercise, diet, cognitive training, sleep, and combination therapies (National Institutes of Health) (2020). Emerging research areas include investigation of specific nutrients and dietary supplements, optimization of exercise prescriptions for cognitive outcomes, integration of emerging technologies for intervention delivery and monitoring, and evaluation of implementation strategies for translating evidence into real-world practice settings.

 

9. Caregiver Support, Communication Strategies, and Behavioral Management

The demands of dementia caregiving exact a considerable toll on caregiver health and well-being. Caregivers of people with Alzheimer’s and related dementias face significantly greater risk for anxiety, depression, and poorer quality of life compared to other caregivers (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). Research has demonstrated that women, Black individuals, and people with lower incomes are more likely to have adult children serving as unpaid caregivers than men, White individuals, and those with higher incomes, highlighting important disparities in caregiving arrangements and support (National Institute on Aging) (2021). These findings underscore the importance of developing equitable caregiving systems that consider both paid and unpaid care options and address the unique needs of diverse populations. The economic burden of dementia caregiving extends beyond direct care costs, with caregivers experiencing substantial out-of-pocket expenses and opportunity costs related to reduced work hours or employment cessation.

 

Recognizing the critical importance of caregiver support, the National Institute on Aging has emphasized that taking care of oneself represents one of the most important actions a caregiver can undertake (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Self-care is not selfish but rather essential for maintaining the capacity to provide effective care over the long term. Caregivers should actively ask for help when needed, as everyone requires assistance at times, and the care of a person with Alzheimer’s often exceeds what one person can provide alone (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Effective support strategies include joining support groups either in person or online to share advice and understanding with other caregivers, obtaining help from home health care or adult day care services when needed, and using national and local resources to identify funding sources for professional help or respite care services. The establishment of a Plan B for situations where care needs increase beyond the primary caregiver’s capacity represents an important component of comprehensive care planning.

 

Multiple evidence-based interventions have been developed to support dementia caregivers and enhance their well-being. The National Institute on Aging currently funds a broad portfolio of care and caregiver research, supporting more than 220 trials of care and caregiving interventions (National Institute on Aging) (2024). These interventions range from developing new research tools and measures to understanding the economic impact of dementia to implementing targeted support programs. Research has shown that providing caregivers with telephone-based dementia care training improves several aspects of care, with trained nurse care managers being more likely to engage in positive care behaviors, including conversations about safety, advanced care planning, and discussions regarding community resources (National Institute on Aging) (2023). Educational programs that teach families about the various stages of Alzheimer’s and strategies for dealing with difficult behaviors and other caregiving challenges have proven beneficial in improving caregiver outcomes (National Institute on Aging) (2024).

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has identified six high-level public health strategies to address the challenges faced by unpaid caregivers, emphasizing the need for improved access to effective interventions, services, and supports for caregiving among underserved populations (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2025). These strategies include embedding systematic identification and assessment of caregivers in health and social systems, actively assisting caregivers in obtaining resources, and assuring that pandemic response and emergency preparedness plans enable continuity in the essential assistance provided by caregivers to people living with dementia. The CDC recognizes caregiving as an essential public health service that should be prioritized as an emerging public health issue, requiring strong public health leadership to engage community partners in driving needed structural changes to support effective, sustained caregiving for all people.

 

Access to respite care services represents a critical component of comprehensive caregiver support. Respite services allow primary caregivers the opportunity to safely leave a person with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias for short or longer periods, including overnight stays, thereby preventing caregiver burnout and maintaining caregiver health (New York State Department of Health) (2024). Adult day centers provide structured environments where individuals with dementia can participate in supervised activities while caregivers attend to other responsibilities or engage in self-care. Home health care services can offer assistance with activities of daily living, providing relief to family caregivers while ensuring that care recipients receive appropriate support in familiar surroundings. The utilization of these support services has been associated with delayed nursing home placement and improved outcomes for both caregivers and care recipients.

 

The Eldercare Locator, a free public service of the Administration for Community Living, serves as a valuable resource for connecting caregivers with services in their communities (Administration for Community Living) (2024). This service assists families in locating area agencies on aging, which provide comprehensive information and assistance in accessing community services for people aged 60 and older, their family members, and caregivers. National organizations such as the Alzheimer’s Association, Alzheimer’s Foundation of America, and Family Caregiver Alliance offer extensive resources including 24-hour helplines, educational materials, support groups, and care consultation services to assist families navigating the complexities of dementia care. These organizations provide critical support infrastructure that complements formal health care services and enhances the capacity of families to provide effective care.

 

Communication Strategies

Communication difficulties represent one of the most challenging aspects of caring for individuals with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. The progressive nature of dementia gradually diminishes a person’s ability to communicate effectively, requiring caregivers to develop patience, understanding, and sophisticated listening skills to maintain meaningful interactions (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Changes in communication ability vary based on the individual and the stage of disease progression, with problems ranging from difficulty finding the right words to complete loss of verbal communication in advanced stages. Understanding these communication challenges and implementing evidence-based strategies can significantly improve the quality of interactions between caregivers and individuals with dementia, enhancing quality of life for both parties.

 

The communication difficulties experienced by individuals with dementia stem from the neurological changes affecting language processing and production centers in the brain. Common problems include difficulty finding the right words, using familiar words repeatedly, describing familiar objects rather than calling them by name, easily losing a train of thought, difficulty organizing words logically, reverting to speaking a native language, speaking less often, and relying more heavily on gestures than speaking (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Vision and hearing loss may also be present in individuals with dementia, and these sensory problems can compound communication challenges and foster a sense of isolation. The progression of communication difficulties typically correlates with disease severity, with verbally non-aggressive behaviors being most prevalent in middle stages when verbal abilities remain partially intact, while aggressive behaviors tend to occur in late stages when verbal communication becomes severely compromised.

 

Effective communication with individuals who have dementia requires caregivers to adapt their communication style and environment to support successful interactions. The National Institute on Aging recommends that caregivers reassure the person, speak calmly, listen to concerns and frustrations, and demonstrate understanding when the person is angry or fearful (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Allowing the person to maintain as much control in their life as possible, respecting personal space, and building quiet times into the day along with activities constitute important environmental modifications that facilitate better communication. Communication can be enhanced by approaching the person from the front, making eye contact when speaking, gaining attention through gentle touch or using the person’s name before starting a conversation, and ensuring that the environment remains calm and free of disturbances that might create confusion or anxiety.

 

Research has identified memory aids combined with specific caregiver training programs as potentially effective interventions for improving verbal communication between individuals with Alzheimer’s disease and their caregivers (Hopper) (2001). Memory aids provide visual cues that remind individuals of the current task or topic of conversation, enabling them to participate more fully in communicative interactions. These aids limit the number of choices that must be made and provide concrete topics for conversation, supporting the desire to communicate which often remains intact in individuals with dementia. Written support can compensate for comprehension deficits that may appear when instructions are provided verbally, offering an alternative channel for information processing when verbal comprehension becomes impaired.

 

Caregiver communication enhancement education and training programs have demonstrated effectiveness in improving interactions between caregivers and care recipients. The FOCUSED program represents one systematic approach designed to provide caregivers with information pertaining to Alzheimer’s disease and communication, correcting any misconceptions regarding communication problems and offering strategies to adapt to the communication changes associated with the disease (Hopper) (2001). Training programs emphasize the importance of providing feedback to caregivers related to their use of specific versus general instructions, one-step instructions, and positive comments to the person with dementia. Tailored strategies that address the particular communication needs of individual persons with Alzheimer’s disease have shown promise in enhancing communication effectiveness.

 

The Alzheimer’s Association has developed comprehensive guidelines for promoting effective communication with persons with dementia throughout the disease progression. During early-stage Alzheimer’s, when symptoms remain mild, communication strategies focus on not making assumptions about a person’s ability to communicate because of the diagnosis, speaking directly to the person rather than to caregivers or companions, taking time to listen to the person express thoughts, feelings and needs, and allowing adequate time for responses without interruption (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Discussing which activities the person remains comfortable doing independently and which may require assistance, along with identifying preferred methods of communication such as face-to-face conversation, email, or phone calls, helps maintain dignity and autonomy during early disease stages.

 

As Alzheimer’s progresses to the middle stage, which typically represents the longest phase and can last for many years, communication strategies must adapt to increasing impairments. The middle stage often involves greater difficulty with language comprehension and expression, requiring caregivers to use simple language, speak slowly, employ short and simple sentences, and provide one-step instructions (Administration on Community Living) (2024). Avoiding negative criticism, offering simple explanations when helping with tasks, and providing choices between two options rather than open-ended questions help reduce frustration and support successful communication. Caregivers should give the person time to respond, being patient and supportive, and should avoid interrupting or criticizing when the person struggles to find words or complete thoughts.

 

During the late stage of Alzheimer’s disease, which may last from several weeks to several years, individuals typically experience severe communication impairments requiring intensive adaptation of communication strategies. The person with dementia may rely primarily on nonverbal communication such as facial expressions, vocal sounds, and body language to convey needs and emotions (Alzheimer’s Association) (2024). Communication strategies for late-stage dementia include approaching the person from the front and identifying oneself, encouraging nonverbal communication, asking the person to point or gesture if verbal expression proves difficult, and using touch, sights, sounds, smells, and tastes as forms of communication. Considering the feelings behind words or sounds becomes particularly important, as the emotions being expressed may be more significant than the literal content of vocalizations.

Treatment strategies aimed at increasing attention and understanding and simplifying conversation have been shown to improve communication skills between people with dementia and care providers (Jelčić et al.) (2014). Health professionals and family caregivers typically receive limited training that enables them to meet the communication needs of people with dementia, and this lack of training can affect the ability to identify needs effectively. Communication training for both professional and family caregivers significantly influences their skills, abilities, and knowledge, improving quality of life and well-being of people with dementia and increasing positive interaction in different care settings (Jelčić et al.) (2014). The importance of speech and language pathologists in treating people with dementia through direct contact for maintaining communication skills and finding compensation strategies, as well as working with caregivers to teach more adequate communication methods, cannot be overstated.

Behavioral Management

 

Behavioral and psychological symptoms represent core clinical features of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, affecting patients and their families throughout the disease course. These behaviors, if left untreated, can contribute to more rapid disease progression, earlier nursing home placement, worse quality of life, accelerated functional decline, greater caregiver distress, and higher health care utilization and costs (Gitlin and Kales) (2012). Behavioral symptoms occur in up to 90 percent of individuals with dementia at some point during their illness, making behavior management an essential component of comprehensive dementia care. Understanding the nature, triggers, and evidence-based management strategies for behavioral symptoms equips caregivers and healthcare providers with tools to maintain quality of life and safety for individuals with dementia while reducing caregiver burden.

 

Alzheimer’s disease changes the brain in ways that affect how a person acts, with some days showing more characteristic behavior and other days featuring unusual actions, a variation that represents a common pattern for people with Alzheimer’s (National Institute on Aging) (2024). In addition to thinking and memory problems, people with Alzheimer’s may experience symptoms such as agitation, trouble sleeping, hallucinations, wandering, pacing, and unusual behaviors that can make caregiving more challenging. It remains critical to remember that the disease, not the person with Alzheimer’s, causes these behavioral changes. Multiple factors may contribute to distressing behaviors in people with Alzheimer’s, including emotions such as sadness, fear, stress, confusion, or anxiety; health-related problems such as pain, lack of sleep, and problems seeing or hearing; and other physical issues such as constipation, hunger, or thirst (National Institute on Aging) (2024).

 

Behavioral symptoms tend to occur in clusters or syndromes including depression, psychosis, agitation, aggression, apathy, sleep disturbances, and executive dysfunction (Gitlin and Kales) (2012). As cognitive impairment alone does not fully explain the etiology of behaviors, these symptoms are now considered central consequences of the diffuse brain damage that brings about cognitive and functional decline in dementia. Because individuals with dementia experience heightened vulnerability to their environment, behavioral symptoms may result from the confluence of multiple, sometimes modifiable, interacting factors including internal features such as pain or fear or external features such as over-stimulating environments or complex caregiver communications. Although behavioral symptoms can occur at any disease stage, certain symptoms appear more frequently at different stages, with depression and apathy being frequently observed in mild cognitive impairment and early-stage Alzheimer’s disease, while hallucinations, delusions, and aggressive behaviors become more common in moderate to severe stages.

Common behavioral disturbances associated with dementia include verbal aggression and threats occurring in approximately 54 percent of patients, physical aggression and agitation in 42 percent, sleep disturbances in 38 percent, restlessness in 38 percent, and wandering in 30 percent (Sink et al.) (2005). Delusions, hallucinations, and depression each affect approximately 30 percent of individuals with Alzheimer’s disease, constituting major psychiatric syndromes that may underlie many behavioral disturbances. More than half of individuals with dementia will exhibit two or more problem behaviors simultaneously, and while fluctuations in frequency and severity occur, behaviors tend to endure for at least six months if left untreated. The more cognitively impaired the patient, the greater the likelihood of exhibiting agitated behavior, and premorbid personality problems are also correlated with higher incidence of behavioral disturbances in dementia patients.

 

Systematic screening for behavioral symptoms in dementia represents an important prevention strategy that facilitates early treatment by identifying underlying causes and tailoring treatment plans accordingly (Kales et al.) (2014). Patients with dementia are typically not screened for behavioral symptoms in primary care settings, and even when clinically reported, they tend to receive ineffective, inappropriate, and fragmented care. However, clinicians are frequently called upon to address behaviors that place patients or others at risk or which families encounter as problematic. Including ongoing systematic screening for behavioral symptoms as part of standard comprehensive dementia care enables prevention and early intervention, potentially averting escalation of problems and reducing associated negative consequences.

Nonpharmacologic approaches are recommended as first-line treatments for managing problematic behaviors because available pharmacologic treatments are only modestly effective, have notable risks, and do not effectively treat some of the behaviors that family members and caregivers find most distressing (Kales et al.) (2014). Strategies for improving behavior include ensuring that the patient’s environment is safe, calm, and predictable; removing environmental stressors; and identifying and avoiding situations that agitate or frighten the patient (Sink et al.) (2005). Simple interventions include redirecting and refocusing the patient, increasing social interaction, establishing regular sleep habits, eliminating sources of conflict and frustration, and establishing rewards for successes. These approaches yield high levels of patient and caregiver satisfaction, quality of life improvements, and reduced behavioral symptoms with minimal risk and adverse reactions, supporting their use as standard components of dementia care.

Essential to a nonpharmacological approach is educating caregivers in ways to effectively prevent and manage behavioral symptoms. The National Institute on Aging recommends that caregivers maintain patience, avoid showing frustration, refrain from arguing, and provide reassurance that they are present to help (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Learning effective communication techniques with persons with Alzheimer’s, redirecting attention to new objects or activities such as listening to music, reading a book, or going for a walk, and creating a comforting home setting by reducing noise and clutter while keeping well-loved objects such as photographs around the home represent practical strategies that caregivers can implement. Maintaining routine by bathing, dressing, and eating at the same time each day and finding ways for the person to be physically active can improve mood and sleep patterns, reducing the likelihood of behavioral symptoms.

 

Specific behavioral management techniques have been developed to address common challenging behaviors. For wandering and pacing, caregivers should ensure the person carries identification or wears a medical bracelet with contact information at all times in case they become lost (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Keeping the home safe by locking up dangerous items or placing them out of sight and reach prevents potential harm during episodes of wandering or confusion. For agitation and aggression, reducing environmental stimuli, maintaining calm communication, avoiding restraint during periods of agitation, and providing opportunities for meaningful activity and exercise can decrease the frequency and intensity of these episodes. Understanding that behavior has purpose and is triggered by specific factors enables caregivers to identify needs the person might be trying to meet and to disrupt patterns that lead to problematic behaviors.

 

Evidence-based nonpharmacologic interventions have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing behavioral symptoms and improving quality of life for both individuals with dementia and their caregivers. The Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer’s Caregiver Health program included environmental skill-building programs provided by occupational therapists, designed to maximize function and decrease the occurrence of behavioral disturbances in individuals with dementia (Teri et al.) (2003). These interventions resulted in significantly less decline in instrumental activities of daily living and reduced behavioral symptoms compared to usual care. Music and art therapy, personalized activities such as reminiscence and socialization, engaging in meaningful activities, and exercise represent common useful strategies that can reduce behavioral symptoms (Desai and Grossberg) (2017).

 

Sensory interventions directed towards individuals with dementia include therapeutic touch, massage, and multi-sensory stimulation such as music, occupational, and physical therapies, with evidence of short-term reduction of anxiety, depression, agitation, apathy, and psychosis (Desai and Grossberg) (2017). Pet therapy may improve socialization, while problem-solving therapy that teaches problem-solving skills and finding solutions to current problems, as well as reminiscence therapy, have shown benefit for reducing depression and anxiety. Conversing one-to-one with a person about their preferred topics of interest may quiet verbally disruptive behavior, demonstrating the importance of personalized approaches that consider individual preferences and life histories.

 

Programs that combine multiple intervention components have shown particular promise in managing behavioral symptoms. The Skills Training for Caregivers program consisted of eight weekly home visits and four monthly telephone calls by trained consultants, teaching behavior management and increasing pleasant events (Teri et al.) (2003). Following treatment, the frequency, severity, and caregiver reactions to behavioral disturbances were significantly decreased, and care recipients’ quality of life was significantly better in the intervention group compared to routine medical care. The Progressively Lowered Stress Threshold approach, based on the premise that as dementia progresses, the affected individual’s ability to adapt to environmental and interpersonal stressors decreases, teaches family caregivers problem-solving strategies to identify and provide activities appropriate for the individual’s current functioning level and to implement environmental modifications that reduce stress.

 

10. Legal, Ethical, and End-of-Life Considerations

Advance care planning involves discussing and preparing for future decisions about medical care if an individual becomes seriously ill or unable to communicate their wishes, with meaningful conversations with loved ones representing the most important part of this planning process (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Many people also choose to put their preferences in writing by completing legal documents called advance directives, which are legal documents that provide instructions for medical care and only go into effect if an individual cannot communicate their own wishes due to disease or severe injury. Research demonstrates that individuals may assume their loved ones know what they would want, but this assumption is not always accurate, with people guessing nearly one out of three end-of-life decisions for their loved ones incorrectly (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Research shows that individuals are more likely to get the care they want if they have conversations about future medical treatment and put a plan in place, and these discussions may also help loved ones grieve more easily and feel less burden, guilt, and depression.

 

Advance directives consist of two primary types of legal documents. A living will is a legal document that tells doctors how an individual wants to be treated if they cannot make their own decisions about emergency treatment, specifying how the individual wants to be cared for if they are dying or permanently unconscious (National Institute on Aging) (2024). This differs from a standard will, which provides legal guidance about a person’s estate including their property and financial assets as well as care for children or adult dependents, gifts, and end-of-life arrangements such as funeral or memorial services and burial or cremation. A durable power of attorney for health care is a legal document that names a health care proxy, who is a person who can make health care decisions for an individual if they are unable to communicate these themselves (National Institute on Aging) (2024). The proxy, also known as a representative, surrogate, or agent, should be familiar with the individual’s values and wishes. Having a health care proxy helps plan for situations that cannot be foreseen such as a serious car accident or stroke, and a proxy can be chosen in addition to or instead of a living will.

 

The process of creating advance directives does not necessarily require legal assistance. A lawyer can help but is not required to create advance directives, though if an individual has a lawyer, they should provide them with a copy of their advance directive (National Institute on Aging) (2024). If help with planning is needed, individuals can contact their local Area Agency on Aging, and other possible sources of legal assistance and referral include state legal aid offices, state bar associations, and local nonprofit agencies, foundations, and social service agencies. Several organizations enable individuals to create, download, and print forms online, though some may charge fees, and before paying for such services, individuals should remember there are several ways to obtain forms for free. Free online resources include PREPARE for Your Care, an interactive online program funded in part by the National Institute on Aging available in English and Spanish, and The Conversation Project, which offers a series of online conversation guides and advance care documents available in English, Spanish, and Chinese.

Advance directives should be treated as living documents that individuals review at least once each year and update if a major life event occurs such as retirement, moving out of state, or a significant change in health status (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Advance care planning is not just for people who are very old or ill, and talking with a doctor about advance care planning is covered by Medicare as part of the annual wellness visit. If an individual has private health insurance, they should check with their insurance provider regarding coverage. Talking with one or more health care providers can help individuals learn about their current health and the kinds of decisions that are likely to come up, and individuals might ask about decisions they or their family may face if particular health conditions lead to complications. Doctors can help individuals understand and think through choices before putting them in writing, and if it makes the person more comfortable, they can ask their health care proxy to come to the appointment with them.

 

Financial planning documents complement health care advance directives in comprehensive estate planning. A will specifies how an individual’s estate including property, money, and other assets will be distributed and managed when they die, and can also address care for children under age 18, adult dependents, and pets as well as gifts and end-of-life arrangements (National Institute on Aging) (2024). If an individual does not have a will, their estate will be distributed according to the laws in their state. A durable power of attorney for finances names someone who will make financial decisions when the individual is unable to, while a living trust names and instructs a person called the trustee to hold and distribute property and funds on behalf of the individual when they are no longer able to manage their affairs. Getting affairs in order through proper documentation and organization can give individuals peace of mind, help ensure wishes are honored, and ease the burden on loved ones during emergency situations and at end-of-life.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, commonly known as HIPAA, establishes national standards to protect individuals’ medical records and other individually identifiable health information collectively defined as protected health information (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2024). The HIPAA Privacy Rule applies to health plans, health care clearinghouses, and health care providers that conduct certain health care transactions electronically, requiring appropriate safeguards to protect the privacy of protected health information and setting limits and conditions on uses and disclosures that may be made of such information without an individual’s authorization. The Privacy Rule gives individuals rights over their protected health information including rights to examine and obtain a copy of their health records, to direct a covered entity to transmit to a third party an electronic copy of their protected health information in an electronic health record, and to request corrections.

Under the HIPAA Privacy Rule, with limited exceptions, individuals have the right to access protected health information maintained about them by a covered entity in a designated record set, which may contain electronic or non-electronic protected health information (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025). Individuals have a right to access a broad array of health information about themselves whether maintained by a covered entity or by a business associate on the covered entity’s behalf, including medical records, billing and payment records, insurance information, clinical laboratory test reports, imaging studies, wellness and disease management program information, consent forms for treatment, and clinical notes among other information generated from treating the individual or paying for care. Providing individuals with easy access to their health information empowers them to be more in control of decisions regarding their health and well-being, allowing them to monitor chronic conditions, adhere to treatment plans, find and fix errors in health records, track progress in wellness or disease management programs, and directly contribute their information to research.

 

The HIPAA Privacy Rule protects all protected health information including individually identifiable health or mental health information held or transmitted by a covered entity in any format including electronic, paper, or oral statements (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2024). Covered entities must put in place safeguards to protect health information and ensure they do not use or disclose health information improperly, reasonably limiting uses and disclosures to the minimum necessary to accomplish their intended purpose. Covered entities must have procedures in place to limit who can view and access health information as well as implement training programs for employees about how to protect health information. Individuals have the right to decide if they want to give permission before their health information can be used or shared for certain purposes such as marketing, and health information cannot be used or shared without written permission unless the law allows it (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) (2025).

 

Ethical Considerations

Informed consent represents a cornerstone of medicine, ensuring ethical treatment decisions and patient-centered care by affirming that patients have the right to make informed and voluntary treatment decisions (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Informed consent is more than merely a signature on a document but rather is a communication process between the clinician and the patient that ensures the patient is fully informed about the nature of the procedure or intervention, the potential risks and benefits, and the alternative treatments available. The patient can refuse or withdraw consent at any time during treatment, and informed consent respects patient autonomy, promotes trust in the patient-provider relationship, and safeguards against unethical practices. As medical care and medical research have become increasingly complex, the role of informed consent continues to become more complicated as new medical challenges arise.

 

The history of informed consent in medicine is rooted in a broader evolution of ethical practices and legal standards surrounding patient autonomy. In the early 20th century, medical practice was largely paternalistic with clinicians making decisions on behalf of patients without necessarily informing them of the details (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). The concept of informed consent began to emerge in response to several landmark legal cases, such as the 1914 case of Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, which established the principle that individuals have the right to determine what happens to their own bodies. American legal decisions beginning in the late 1800s and progressively working their way up through higher courts forced health care providers to adopt minimum requirements, with particularly significant cases in 1972 including Canterbury v. Spence, Cobbs v. Grant, and Wilkinson v. Vesey establishing informed consent as a fundamental patient right.

The informed consent process serves ethical and legal purposes by safeguarding patient rights, fostering transparency, and promoting trust between healthcare professionals and patients. Informed consent ensures that patients understand the risks, benefits, alternatives, and potential consequences of medical interventions, allowing them to weigh their options and participate actively in their treatment plans (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). This process is critical for respecting patient autonomy and allowing individuals to make decisions aligned with their values, beliefs, and preferences. In addition, informed consent protects clinicians by documenting that patients were adequately informed, reducing legal liability in case of adverse outcomes. Ultimately, informed consent serves as a tool to enhance patient-centered care and strengthen the clinician-patient relationship through open, honest communication.

Four main ethical principles guide clinical practice and medical decision-making. Beneficence represents the ethical obligation to benefit the patient, examining the risk-benefit ratio of proposed medical treatment while simultaneously maximizing patient benefit and minimizing harm or discomfort, and involves both making decisions to benefit the patient as well as taking affirmative steps to prevent or remove harm from the patient (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2023). What is beneficial for a patient is highly personal and multi-faceted, involving consideration of the patient’s medical prognosis as well as multiple subjective factors such as goals of care, quality of life, financial considerations, and family input. Nonmaleficence, often summarized by the phrase “do no harm,” instructs practitioners to avoid causing harm to patients through their actions or inactions. Autonomy, the root ethical principle counseling practitioners to uphold and allow for patient self-determination, includes allowing all appropriate patients the opportunity for informed consent before receiving medical treatment or undergoing procedures. Justice involves fair distribution of healthcare resources and equitable treatment of all patients regardless of their circumstances.

 

Patient autonomy in clinical decision-making has normative significance for multiple reasons. Firstly, it sets the parameters within which patients should be immune from paternalistic clinical interventions, with informed consent serving as the standard mechanism through which a patient establishes the boundaries of their sovereignty (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2022). However, the right to partake in practices of informed consent without third-party involvement is only extended to adult patients who are presumed to fulfill threshold cognitive capacities for autonomous decision-making. Competency, mental capacity, and capacity for autonomy are often treated as having the same meanings, such that on the basis of consensus amongst medical ethicists, a competent or capacitous individual is considered to have the capacity for reason including the capacities to comprehend information, critically reflect on and revise beliefs, and make decisions in light of information.

 

For informed consent to be valid, several elements must be present. The patient must be competent, meaning capable of making a reasoned decision about their medical care, and identifying criteria for determining whether an individual is competent to make a decision includes assessing whether the person can communicate choices, understand and assess information given to them, and appreciate the consequences of a decision (University of Miami) (2000). The patient must be adequately informed before giving consent, including but not limited to being informed by the health care team of the risks and benefits of a given procedure, the likelihood of the procedure’s success, and alternative options to the procedure. The consent must be voluntary and not coerced, meaning the patient should not be forced against their wishes into making a choice. In situations where patients lack decision-making capacity, surrogate decision-makers may be appointed to make decisions on their behalf, though physicians should engage patients whose capacity is impaired in decisions involving their own care to the greatest extent possible, including when the patient has previously designated a surrogate.

The principle of respect for persons recognizes the importance of upholding patient autonomy while also acknowledging that some situations may require protective measures when individuals cannot adequately protect their own interests. In situations where informed consent is not feasible because a patient’s decision-making capacity is overwhelmed by the sheer complexity or volume of information at hand, clinicians should consider shifting from prioritizing informed consent to protecting their patient (American Medical Association) (2016). The duty to prevent harm remains paramount when patient autonomy is not feasible, and clinicians’ other ethical commitments remain in place and should still be discharged. Given the primacy of the ethical injunction to avoid patient harm, situations exist where the information involved in making a decision is of such a nature that the decision-making capacity of a patient is overwhelmed by complexity.

 

Confidentiality springs from the principle of autonomy and represents another critical ethical obligation in healthcare. The HIPAA Privacy Rule establishes legal requirements for maintaining patient confidentiality, but ethical obligations to protect patient privacy existed long before these regulations (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) (2024). Healthcare providers have an ethical duty to protect the privacy of patient information, sharing information only when necessary for treatment, when required by law, or when the patient has given explicit permission for disclosure. Maintaining confidentiality builds trust in the patient-provider relationship and protects patients from potential harm that could result from unauthorized disclosure of sensitive health information. Breaches of confidentiality can damage the therapeutic relationship, cause psychological harm to patients, and potentially result in discrimination or other negative consequences for patients.

 

Truth-telling represents another ethical principle that derives from respect for patient autonomy. Healthcare providers have a moral obligation to provide their patients with accurate and complete information in most circumstances, though debates continue concerning whether truth-telling is an absolute moral obligation (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2021). Some argue that a therapeutic exception may be appropriate in cases where sharing information might jeopardize the health of the patient, though this paternalistic approach has fallen out of favor in contemporary medical ethics. Over the last several decades, respect for autonomy has come to be recognized as a fundamental principle in bioethics, and in general, a patient’s autonomy should be respected even if the patient decides not to follow a health care team’s advice. Respect for autonomy has helped redefine the physician-patient relationship as patients have become more active participants in making health care decisions.

End-of-Life Considerations

 

Palliative care and hospice care both focus on the comfort, care, and quality of life of individuals with serious illness, with hospice care representing a specific type of palliative care that is provided in the final weeks or months of life (National Institute on Aging) (2024). Although these two forms of care are similar in some ways, they differ as to when and where care is received and which treatment options are available. Palliative care is focused on improving quality of life for people with serious illnesses and their care partners, and this form of care can start as early as a person’s diagnosis or not until later in their illness. Palliative care can occur alongside other types of treatment for the disease and includes but is not limited to advance care planning, end-of-life care, hospice care, and bereavement support. A palliative care team is made up of multiple different professionals that work with the patient, family, and the patient’s other doctors to provide medical, social, emotional, and practical support.

Palliative care is a resource for anyone living with a serious illness such as heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and many others. In addition to improving quality of life and helping with symptoms, palliative care can help patients understand their choices for medical treatment (National Institute on Aging) (2024). The organized services available through palliative care may be helpful to any older person experiencing considerable general discomfort and disability very late in life. The World Health Organization defines palliative care as the active total care of patients whose disease is not responsive to curative regimen, with the goal of achieving the highest quality of care for the patient and family (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2012). It affirms the sanctity of life and regards death as a normal process, neither hastens nor postpones death, provides relief from physical and psychological sufferings, and offers a support system to help patients live as actively as possible and the family cope with bereavement.

 

Hospice care brings together a team of people with special skills including nurses, doctors, social workers, spiritual advisors, and trained volunteers, with everyone working together with the person who is dying, the caregiver, and family to provide the medical, emotional, and spiritual support needed (National Institute on Aging) (2024). A member of the hospice team visits regularly, and someone is usually always available by phone 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Hospice may be covered by Medicare and other insurance companies, and individuals should check to see if insurance will cover their particular situation. Choosing hospice does not have to be a permanent decision, and individuals have the right to discontinue hospice services at any time if their condition improves or if they change their mind about their treatment goals. Families of people who received care through a hospice program are more satisfied with end-of-life care than those who did not have hospice services, and hospice recipients are more likely to have their pain controlled and less likely to undergo tests or be given medicines they don’t need compared with people who don’t use hospice care.

 

In the United States, people enrolled in Medicare can receive hospice care if their health care provider thinks they have less than six months to live should the disease take its usual course. Medicare eligibility for hospice requires that the patient is eligible for Medicare Part A, the patient’s physician and the hospice medical director certify that the patient is terminally ill with a life expectancy of six months or less if the disease runs its normal course, the patient signs a statement electing hospice care instead of standard Medicare benefits for the terminal illness, and the patient receives care from a Medicare-certified hospice program (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) (2024). Eligible patients are entitled to receive two 90-day benefit periods followed by an unlimited number of 60-day benefit periods with recertification requirements. These periods may be used consecutively or at intervals, but the patient must be certified as terminally ill at the beginning of each benefit period.

 

Hospice services covered by Medicare include on-call services, physician services, nursing services, social services, therapy services including physical and occupational therapy, home health aide services, counseling services including dietary counseling and bereavement services for family members, medical supplies and equipment, and drugs for symptom management related to the terminal illness (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2012). Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimburses hospices on a per diem basis for all care related to the terminal prognosis, with base rates supplemented by a service intensity add-on during the last seven days of life. Despite the benefits of using hospice care, many people wait to receive hospice care until the final weeks or days of life, and it is important to talk with a doctor about illness progression and how disease is advancing. Starting hospice early may be able to provide months of meaningful care and quality time with loved ones.

 

Historically, the Medicare Hospice Benefit has required that beneficiaries with a terminal illness and a prognosis of less than six months revoke traditional curative care and elect hospice care for symptom management to maximize quality of life at end of life (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2016). This restriction created a barrier to effective care for individuals with advanced illness who would prefer to simultaneously pursue curative treatment and receive hospice services. During negotiations to establish the Medicare hospice benefit in 1982, the budget director for the Reagan Administration insisted that Medicare should not pay for simultaneous curative and hospice services because costs would be too high, and hospice leadership participating in the meetings eventually agreed to the restriction. Patients and clinicians alike struggled with the transition from curative to palliative care required by the Medicare Hospice Benefit, and as a result, hospice organizations began looking for ways to provide concurrent care preferred by many patients and clinicians and aligned with the original hospice philosophy.

 

End-of-life care may involve a team of doctors, nurses, palliative or hospice staff, counselors, and religious community members addressing multiple areas of need. Physical comfort represents a primary concern, as the person may experience pain, breathing problems, skin irritation, digestive issues, fatigue, or temperature sensitivities, and these symptoms can be hard to manage requiring consultation with health care providers about how best to relieve them (National Institutes of Health) (2025). Palliative medical specialists are experienced in pain management for seriously ill patients and should be consulted if not already involved. Pain is easier to prevent than to relieve, and severe pain is hard to manage, so caregivers should try to make sure that the level of pain does not get ahead of pain-relieving medicines. Morphine is an opiate used to treat serious pain and is sometimes given to ease the feeling of shortness of breath, and successfully reducing pain and addressing concerns about breathing can provide needed comfort to someone who is close to dying.

 

Mental and emotional needs require attention during end-of-life care. Being present with the person, setting a comforting mood by playing music, reading, or holding hands if they wish, and involving counselors with experience in end-of-life emotional issues can provide valuable support (National Institutes of Health) (2025). Spiritual needs often become particularly important at the end of life, with many people finding solace in their faith while others may struggle with spiritual beliefs. Talking, praying together, or listening to religious music can help address these needs. Practical tasks also require attention, and families should talk with doctors and hospice providers about what to expect over the coming hours, days, or weeks to be better prepared for changes that may occur. Although hospice staff provide substantial support for someone who is dying, family or caregivers often provide much of the day-to-day care.

Do-not-resuscitate orders represent medical orders placed in a person’s medical record by a doctor instructing medical staff that cardiopulmonary resuscitation should not be attempted if the patient’s heart stops or breathing ceases. Because cardiopulmonary resuscitation is not attempted, other resuscitative measures that follow it such as electric shocks to the heart and artificial respirations by insertion of a breathing tube will also be avoided (Merck Manual) (2025). This order has been useful in preventing unnecessary and unwanted invasive treatment at the end of life, as the success rate of cardiopulmonary resuscitation near the end of life is extremely low. As part of care planning for seriously ill people, individuals and their doctors should discuss the possibility of cardiac arrest in light of immediate medical condition, discuss cardiopulmonary resuscitation procedures and likely outcomes, and discuss treatment preferences.

 

Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment, commonly known as POLST and also referred to by other names in different states such as Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment, Clinician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment, or Provider Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment, represent portable medical orders that communicate end-of-life care decisions of people with advanced illness (National POLST) (2023). A POLST differs from advance directives in that it applies only to people with advanced illness, provides a treatment plan in the form of medical orders for emergency decisions, and focuses on the person’s current condition rather than a future hypothetical condition. Like a do-not-resuscitate order, a POLST form tells emergency medical personnel and other medical providers whether or not to administer cardiopulmonary resuscitation in case of emergency, but unlike a do-not-resuscitate order, a POLST form includes directions about several other life-sustaining measures such as intubation, antibiotic use, and feeding tubes.

 

The POLST form helps ensure that medical providers will understand wishes at a glance, but it is not a substitute for a thorough and properly prepared health care directive or living will. A POLST form lives in medical records and travels with the individual when they move between health facilities, and it is often prepared to ensure that different health care facilities and service providers including emergency medical services personnel understand a patient’s wishes (CaringInfo) (2024). In most states, a POLST form is printed on brightly colored paper such as pink or green so it will easily stand out in a patient’s medical records. POLST forms must be filled out and signed by a health care provider together with the patient or their legally recognized health care decision-maker, and properly executed orders do not expire but should be reviewed when there is a change in the patient’s health status, care setting, or goals.

 

11. Research Frontiers and Future Therapeutic Directions

Clinical trials represent essential examinations that test the efficacy, security, efficiency, and practicability of innovative medical interventions, therapies, or procedures in human beings, serving as critical steps in the translational research process that bridges the gap between preclinical studies conducted in laboratory settings and the application of medical innovations in real-world clinical practice (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). The importance of human clinical trials cannot be overstated, as they provide platforms for assessing the safety of new medical interventions, determining therapeutic efficacy through systematic evaluation, and establishing optimal dosing regimens that balance effectiveness with minimizing adverse effects. Through the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, the National Institutes of Health supports clinical research networks including the Rare Diseases Clinical Research Network and the Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program that have been leaders in engaging patients and communities through the entire research process, focusing on different aspects of clinical trial site readiness (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences) (2024).

 

The Trial Innovation Network represents a collaborative national network supported through the Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program that has taken great strides toward making clinical trials run better, faster, and more cost-effectively. Through the Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program, the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences has received 445 requests for support leading to 37 funded trials, with this infrastructure enabling quick response to public health emergencies including Zika, Ebola, the opioid epidemic, and most recently the COVID pandemic (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences) (2024). The Protocol Assessment Team works with academic and National Institutes of Health clinical research teams on many facets of trial planning, and an expanded area of emphasis includes enhancing recruitment of diverse individuals in multisite clinical trials. The Trial Innovation Network has been a leader in establishing and advising on electronic health record-driven recruitment strategies with the goal of enhancing research planning, clinical trial design, and enrollment and retention in trials.

 

Future clinical trials are expected to include first-in-human studies for new gene-targeted approaches such as N-of-small gene therapy, gene editing, and antisense oligonucleotide, as well as precision modeling approaches including Clinical Trials on a Chip and in silico or emulation trials that use real-world data (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences) (2024). The Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program is expected to serve as a pathway for integrating primary care settings into the broader landscape of clinical research, representing a priority area for advancing translational medicine. Another significant advancement addressing roadblocks to multicenter clinical trials is the SMART IRB platform which provides a broadly shared and agreed-upon institutional review board reliance agreement that can shorten the institutional review board step from months to weeks or in impressive examples to days, facilitating more efficient initiation of clinical research across multiple sites.

 

The National Institutes of Health has launched several next-generation precision medicine clinical trials that exemplify the future of translational research. The myeloMATCH trial, also known as the Myeloid Malignancies Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice, represents a proof-of-concept precision medicine clinical trial testing new treatment combinations targeting specific genetic changes in cancer cells of people with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes (National Cancer Institute) (2024). People enrolled in the trial with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes undergo rapid genetic testing of their tumor samples, and based on the molecular characteristics of their tumors, they are matched to a substudy testing a treatment appropriate for the specific genetic changes and characteristics associated with their disease. The goal of myeloMATCH is to test combinations of drugs to treat the disease in a highly targeted way and to be able to start treatment quickly after diagnosis.

The myeloMATCH trial is one of three next-generation precision medicine trials that the National Cancer Institute has underway. ComboMATCH is testing the effectiveness of treating adults and children who have relapsed solid tumors with new drug combinations that target specific tumor alterations, while ImmunoMATCH has launched a pilot study to determine whether prospective characterization of the immune status of a tumor can be used to improve the response to targeted immunotherapy treatments with plans to expand to larger studies in the future (National Cancer Institute) (2024). All three trials are successors to NCI-MATCH, the National Cancer Institute’s groundbreaking precision medicine clinical trial which showed that people with advanced cancer may benefit from genomic sequencing to help plan their treatment. The National Institutes of Health is uniquely positioned to conduct these types of studies which are helping pave the way for more personalized treatment of cancer, and by making these trials available to patients in communities around the country, cutting edge science is brought to people where they live ensuring that what is learned from study participants can benefit patients like them in the future.

 

Precision Medicine and Genomics

The essence of precision medicine is to achieve the goal of individualized treatment through genotyping of patients and targeted therapy, with genomic and molecular profiling-based precision medicine now used as part of routine clinical testing for guiding and selecting the most appropriate treatments for individual cancer patients (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2021). The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology Executive Office of the President of the United States clarified in September 2008 that the term personalized medicine does not entail the creation of drugs or medical devices that are uniquely tailored to each patient but rather the ability to categorize individuals into subpopulations based on differences in their susceptibility to a particular disease or their response to specific treatments, allowing preventive or therapeutic interventions to be concentrated on those who will benefit while sparing expense and side effects for those who will not (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024).

 

Recent scientific advancements in high-throughput, high-resolution data-generating technologies allow cost-effective analysis of big datasets on individuals, with the integration of multi-omics data mainly encompassing genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics enabling a comprehensive understanding of individual health by analyzing genetic, molecular, and biochemical profiles (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). The generation and integration of multi-omics data enable more precise and tailored therapeutic strategies improving the efficacy of treatments and reducing adverse effects. Artificial intelligence techniques are applied in precision cardiovascular medicine to analyze genotypes and phenotypes in established diseases with this application aiming to enhance patient care quality, promote cost-effectiveness, and lower rates of readmission and mortality. The advancement of artificial intelligence and machine learning is transforming cancer treatment through personalized therapeutic choices, with artificial intelligence innovations examining genetic and molecular profiles of tumors to pinpoint the most effective targeted therapies while machine learning models forecast which patients are probable to benefit from immunotherapy thereby enhancing treatment outcomes.

 

Next-generation sequencing technologies have been central to the development of targeted therapy and immunotherapy for precision oncology, with next-generation sequencing data allowing for comprehensive cancer genome landscapes including genetic alterations, gene expression, and epigenetic profiles (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2019). Several next-generation sequencing-based cancer diagnostic tests in addition to conventional sequencing or polymerase chain reaction-based tests have been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration, and these cancer diagnostic tests can serve as companion diagnostics for approved molecular-targeted drugs and are utilized for patient enrollment in clinical trials of targeted cancer therapies. Genetic or molecular profiling of individual tumors provides critical information to predict efficacy and risk of toxicity of drugs, with recent advances in sequencing technologies enabling identification of many genetic biomarkers including somatic and germline mutations, gene amplifications or fusions.

 

One of the possibly useful biomarkers to predict checkpoint inhibitor responsiveness indicated by genomic approaches is the number of somatic mutations altering amino acid sequences called tumor mutation burden that leads to the generation of tumor-specific antigens known as neoantigens (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2021). In an analysis of 1,638 immunotherapy-treated patients, higher tumor mutation burden at 20 or more mutations per megabase was an independent predictor for better progression-free survival and overall survival. Another analysis of 1,662 advanced cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors also showed that patients with higher tumor mutation burden in the highest 20 percent in each cancer type had significantly better overall survival. Highly cancer-specific antigens derived from somatic mutations called neoantigens occurring in individual cancers have been in focus recently, and cancer immunotherapies which target neoantigens could lead to precise treatment for cancer patients despite the challenge in accurately predicting neoantigens that can induce cytotoxic T cells in individual patients.

Gene Therapy and Gene Editing Technologies

Gene therapy has long been a cornerstone in the treatment of rare diseases and genetic disorders offering targeted solutions to conditions once considered untreatable, and as the field advances, its transformative potential is now expanding into oncology where personalized therapies address the genetic and immune-related complexities of cancer (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Revolutionary gene therapy strategies include gene replacement, gene silencing, oncolytic virotherapy, chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy, and CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing with a focus on their application in both hematologic malignancies and solid tumors. CRISPR-Cas9 represents a revolutionary tool in precision medicine enabling precise editing of cancer-driving mutations, enhancing immune responses, and disrupting tumor growth mechanisms. While early CRISPR therapies were primarily ex vivo applications, in vivo applications are now advancing with examples including Intellia Therapeutics’ NTLA-2002 which uses CRISPR-Cas9 directly within the body to edit genes responsible for hereditary angioedema, a rare genetic disorder related to inflammatory pathways.

 

Clinical trials involving CRISPR therapies have made strides in treating genetic disorders like sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia, with CRISPR used to edit hematopoietic stem cells boosting fetal hemoglobin production offering the potential for a one-time cure (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Notably, Exa-cel, a CRISPR-Cas9-based therapy for sickle cell disease and beta-thalassemia, is nearing regulatory approval in the United States marking a milestone for gene editing in medicine. In the realm of oncology, CRISPR is transforming cancer treatment through the development of immunotherapies, and these advancements highlight the transformative potential of gene editing in treating genetic diseases. However, germline editing which involves modifying DNA in human embryos, eggs, or sperm remains prohibited in most countries due to ethical, safety, and regulatory concerns.

In 2021, the World Health Organization emphasized the need for stringent oversight and governance of germline genome editing citing potential heritable risks, and the International Commission on the Clinical Use of Human Germline Genome Editing similarly stressed the need for extensive preclinical research and international dialog before any clinical applications (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Reflecting these unresolved concerns, germline gene editing remains largely restricted whereas somatic gene editing progresses within clinical settings. In 2024, the World Health Organization and other international bodies reinforced rigorous ethical guidelines especially around germline editing to address the societal and heritable implications of rapidly advancing gene-editing technologies. The Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy designation introduced in 2017 is one of the critical regulatory innovations that expedites the development and approval of gene therapies, providing expedited review and approval processes for medicines that treat serious or life-threatening conditions helping to reduce the time and costs associated with clinical trials.

 

Immunotherapy and Cancer Treatment

Next-generation immunotherapies have revolutionized cancer treatment offering hope for patients with hard-to-treat tumors, with key immune-based therapies including immune checkpoint inhibitors, chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy, and new cancer vaccines designed to harness the immune system (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Immunotherapy drugs indirectly attack cancer by inducing the immune system to attack and treat cancer, and the discovery of a link between cancer cells escaping immune destruction and cancer progression led to extensive research into this mechanism and drug development. In the past few years, the United States Food and Drug Administration has granted accelerated approval to several immunotherapy cancer treatment drugs including pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and atezolizumab belonging to the class of checkpoint inhibitors. Utilization of pretreatment genomic cancer screening to identify patients most likely to respond to immunotherapy and to customize immunotherapy for a given patient promises to improve cancer treatment outcomes.

Personalized immunotherapy is revolutionizing cancer treatment by utilizing precision medicine to create tailored therapies that align with the unique characteristics of each patient’s tumor, aiming to maximize treatment effectiveness while minimizing side effects by focusing on the distinct molecular and genetic makeup of the tumor as well as the patient’s overall health and genetic predispositions (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). In precision medicine for tumor immunotherapy, extensive genomic, proteomic, and transcriptomic analyses guide treatment choices, and by pinpointing specific genetic mutations, changes in signaling pathways, and immune system profiles, this approach enables the development of targeted therapies that are more likely to succeed for individual patients. Treatments are not only more effective but also less likely to induce unnecessary side effects as they specifically exploit the tumor’s vulnerabilities rather than apply a generic solution.

 

Combination therapies which integrate multiple treatment modalities have demonstrated great promise in overcoming the limitations of single-agent therapies, and by combining immunotherapy with chemotherapy, photothermal therapy, or targeted drug delivery, researchers can simultaneously target multiple pathways involved in tumor growth and resistance (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). For example, integrating photothermal therapy and immunotherapy using iron oxide nanoplatforms has demonstrated remarkable efficacy in pancreatic cancer treatment, and similarly multifunctional nanocarriers that deliver chemotherapeutic agents and immunomodulators can enhance anti-tumor immune responses and improve therapeutic outcomes. One significant advantage of targeted therapy and immunotherapy combinations is the ability to address tumor heterogeneity which refers to the existence of genetically diverse cancer cells within the same tumor, with targeted therapies reducing the prevalence of certain tumor subclones while immunotherapy addresses the remaining subclones creating a more comprehensive treatment approach.

 

Chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy represents one of the most promising immunotherapy methods, though its usage is accompanied by adverse side effects of cytokine release syndrome and chimeric antigen receptor-related encephalopathy syndrome (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2019). Recently it has been shown that chimeric antigen receptor T cells indirectly cause cytokine release syndrome by inducing macrophages to release interleukin-6, interleukin-1, and nitric oxide. One approach to minimize the side effects of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy could be to decrease immune activation through strategic manipulation of these pathways. Single-cell RNA sequencing revealed several differentially expressed genes between functional and exhausted T cells, and overexpression of a relatively unknown gene LAYN or Layilin in a retroviral vector was sufficient to suppress the function of functional T cells, suggesting that future advances in understanding T cell exhaustion with genomics and experimental techniques will facilitate development of novel solutions to overcome challenges associated with low immunotherapy efficiency caused by T cell exhaustion.

 

Therapeutic cancer vaccines have been shown to improve the treatment outcome of chemotherapy and checkpoint inhibitors, with advances in next-generation sequencing technologies, computational algorithms, and bioinformatics tools expected to improve identification of neoantigens and improve the outcome of cancer vaccines for precision oncology (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2019). Single-cell genomics will be particularly useful to uncover the heterogeneity of cancer gene expression, mutations, and new types of immune cells within the same tumor which could then be applied for development of cancer vaccines targeting distinct clonal populations within the tumor. In vaccines for immunotherapy, the immune system is stimulated to produce antibodies inside the body or in vivo, while in adoptive T cell therapy, T cells are isolated from the body, expanded, and stimulated ex vivo before being infused back to the patient.

 

Nanotechnology and Drug Delivery Systems

Human clinical trials of advanced nanoparticles represent a significant frontier in medical research providing diverse solutions across various healthcare fields, with nanoparticles engineered at the nanoscale possessing unique characteristics conducive to precise medical interventions (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Their small size facilitates efficient systemic circulation and penetration into cellular and subcellular compartments, and nanoparticles offer versatile platforms for therapeutic interventions spanning from cancer treatment to regenerative medicine. Their capacity to modulate cellular behavior, deliver therapeutic payloads, and interact at the molecular level highlights their potential in personalized medicine. As human clinical trials continue to uncover the breadth of nanoparticle applications, the convergence of nanotechnology and medicine holds promise for groundbreaking advancements in patient care ushering in an era of precision healthcare.

By functionalizing nanoparticle surfaces with targeting ligands or antibodies, researchers can direct them to specific sites within the body enabling targeted therapy with minimal off-target effects, and this capability holds immense promise for personalized medicine as nanoparticles can be designed to deliver therapeutics to individual patients based on their unique molecular profiles (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). In addition to their surface properties, nanoparticles exhibit unique optical and magnetic characteristics that make them invaluable tools for medical imaging. Nanoparticle-based contrast agents like iron oxide particles used in magnetic resonance imaging or quantum dots for fluorescence imaging present enhanced imaging capabilities in contrast to traditional agents, and these advanced imaging techniques provide clinicians with high-resolution visualization of biological structures and pathological processes facilitating timely detection, precise diagnosis, and treatment monitoring.

 

Beyond chemotherapy, nanoparticles have been investigated for alternative modalities in oncology including photothermal therapy and photodynamic therapy, with gold nanoparticles employed as photothermal agents selectively heating and eliminating tumor cells when exposed to near-infrared light (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Clinical trials assessing the safety and effectiveness of gold nanoparticle-based photothermal therapy in patients with different solid tumors have yielded encouraging outcomes demonstrating tumor regression and minimal adverse effects. Despite these advancements, challenges remain in optimizing nanoparticle-based therapies for oncology including issues related to nanoparticle stability, scalability, and heterogeneity in patient responses. Moreover, the development of resistance mechanisms and the potential for off-target effects necessitate ongoing research efforts to refine nanoparticle formulations and treatment strategies.

 

Nanomedicine has emerged as a promising field promoting innovative drug delivery systems designed to cross the blood-brain barrier optimizing therapeutic efficacy and minimizing adverse effects (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Cancer treatment has been revolutionized by immunotherapy and nanomedicine offering innovative strategies to overcome the tumor microenvironment complexities, though challenges such as therapeutic resistance, off-target effects, and immune evasion persist. Strategies to remodel the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment are particularly promising, as evidenced by paclitaxel-loaded ginsenoside Rg3 liposomes that simultaneously target tumor cells and remodel the tumor microenvironment improving antitumor efficacy through macrophage repolarization. Similarly, tumor microenvironment-responsive nanocapsules delivering CRISPR/Cas9 effectively inhibit hepatocellular carcinoma progression and promote immunotherapy demonstrating the potential of combining gene editing with nanomedicine approaches.

 

Advances in Neurodegenerative Disease Research

Alzheimer’s disease remains one of the most pressing public health problems characterized by progressive and irreversible decline in cognitive function affecting millions of people worldwide, with the burden it creates for patients, families and healthcare systems highlighting the urgent need for advances in early detection and effective therapies (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Although research in this field has grown considerably in recent decades, disease-modifying treatments remain elusive highlighting the intricate complexity of Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology and the need for new diagnostic and therapeutic tools. In recent decades one of the most challenging targets for researchers has been identifying early biomarkers and developing interventions that can prevent or slow disease progression. Recognized as strong indicators of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, biomarkers allow for the detection of neurodegenerative changes long before the clinical onset of symptoms, and advances in positron emission tomography further facilitate the in vivo visualization of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles offering transformative tools for early and accurate diagnosis.

These advances in biomarkers not only improve diagnostic accuracy but also enable real-time monitoring of therapeutic efficacy in clinical trials linking structural changes in the brain to clinical outcomes (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Recent research has highlighted the important role of chronic neuroinflammation in accelerating neurodegenerative processes in Alzheimer’s disease, with activated microglia together with proinflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-1 beta, interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha contributing to neuronal damage and the progression of neurodegeneration. These insights into immune-related mechanisms open potential avenues for immunomodulatory therapies, and advances in genetic studies are shedding light on other risk factors. According to the Global Burden of Disease Study, the prevalence of dementia is expected to exceed 152 million cases by 2050 largely due to population aging, and addressing modifiable risk factors such as physical inactivity, hypertension and smoking can prevent up to 40 percent of dementia cases reinforcing the need for robust public health interventions and creating a basis for preventive approaches in Alzheimer’s disease research.

 

A fundamental shift in Alzheimer’s disease research has been the focus on prevention and early intervention particularly during the preclinical stages of the disease, with advances in biomarkers and genetic profiling now making it possible to identify individuals at high risk for Alzheimer’s disease long before clinical symptoms appear facilitating the implementation of preventive strategies ranging from lifestyle modifications to targeted pharmacotherapy (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). This knowledge highlights the critical role of modifiable risk factors and underlines the value of preventive approaches. The future of Alzheimer’s disease treatment lies in combining scientific rigor with compassionate multidisciplinary care translating research advances into tangible benefits for the millions affected by this debilitating disease, and while the journey to conquer Alzheimer’s disease is challenging, the rapid strides being made in research, technology and compassionate care inspire hope that in the not-too-distant future solutions may be found to preserve memory, dignity, and quality of life.

For Parkinson’s disease, as of January 31, 2024, records of 179 active interventional clinical trials were downloaded from ClinicalTrials.gov meeting search criteria for drug therapies in the clinical trial pipeline (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Important advances include publications describing biomarker approaches important for assessing Parkinson’s disease-relevant biology such as validation of the alpha-synuclein seeding assay as a sensitive and specific measure of Parkinson’s disease-associated synucleinopathy and development of a blood-based mitochondrial damage assay which may prove particularly valuable for testing biological impact of drugs targeting LRRK2. Additional advances may increase ability to assess dopamine system dysfunction such as detection of elevated DOPA decarboxylase levels in cerebrospinal fluid and data showing potential of vesicular monoamine transporter 2 brain imaging as a measure of early Parkinson’s disease progression. These new measurement tools offer potential for identifying specific biological features, forms and progression of Parkinson’s disease, and it is encouraging to note that some of these approaches are already being employed in ongoing clinical trials.

 

Over the last few years there has been a significant increase in the number of newly registered trials evaluating anti-inflammatory therapeutics, with seven anti-inflammatory agents in clinical trials of which five were newly registered (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). There were also four newly registered clinical trials assessing cell therapies demonstrating that this is an area of increased research activity. Disease-modifying treatments attempt to delay or slow progression by targeting the underlying biology of Parkinson’s disease while symptomatic treatments improve or reduce symptoms of the condition, and trials are assigned to categories using an iterative process that considers both the mechanism of action and the drug target. The ultimate measure of impact for all this progress is to observe advances in new therapy development for Parkinson’s disease, and annual reviews of experimental agents in clinical trials provide better understanding of the Parkinson’s disease drug development pipeline highlighting progress, pointing out areas of concern, and stimulating greater awareness and engagement in the clinical trial process.

 

Future Directions and Emerging Technologies

The National Institutes of Health has added 662 million dollars in funds received in 2024 to ensure that researchers can continue making progress toward understanding, diagnosing, preventing, and treating Long COVID through the RECOVER initiative (National Institutes of Health) (2024). In October 2024, the National Institutes of Health issued a Request For Information to gather ideas on candidate pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions for the next phase of trials which will remain open until February 1, 2025, and additionally the National Institutes of Health opened a portal for idea submission for therapeutics and biologics and established a review process for vetting these ideas. RECOVER-TLC will design nimble clinical trials with direct and transparent engagement with scientific, industry, and patient communities continuing to provide access and sharing of deidentified data with public and scientific communities. The 662 million dollars in funds will be allocated over Fiscal Years 2025-2029 to support additional pathobiology studies to examine how Long COVID affects different parts of the body which will help to inform clinical trials, preservation and broader access to data and biospecimens and maintaining RECOVER-supported research infrastructure over the next five years.

 

The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development made advances in 2024 including completion of the two million dollar RADx Tech Fetal Monitoring Challenge with six finalists receiving top honors for their solutions to improve fetal health diagnosis, detection, and monitoring (National Institutes of Health) (2024). Winning technologies include a device to detect fetal stress, an artificial intelligence model for early detection of congenital heart disease, and a wearable ultrasound patch to monitor fetal vascular health. The institute funded two fibroid research centers to specifically address health disparities as Black women are more likely to experience severe and recurring symptoms of uterine fibroids, and researchers found that three common surgeries to repair pelvic organ prolapse are generally comparable and safe giving patients and health care providers important clinical evidence to aid discussion of treatment options.

 

Pharmaceutical industry leaders worldwide view precision medicine as a significant opportunity, and despite facing internal and external hurdles, only a few companies have successfully capitalized on its potential (National Center for Biotechnology Information) (2024). Despite the promise of pharmacogenomics technologies to drive fundamental advances in biological sciences such as discovering disease-causing genes and new therapeutic targets, industry concerns can arise regarding products designed with pharmacogenomics guidance for specific patient populations. The integration of pharmacogenomic testing and multi-omics data into personalized medicine represents a new standard in the medical field highlighting potential benefits, challenges, and strategies for implementation while emphasizing the role of personalized medicine in enhancing medication quality control and therapeutic efficacy. Machine learning models and quantitative histopathological analyses are being utilized to predict the efficacy of immunotherapies and identify patients who are most likely to benefit from specific treatments, and these advancements improve treatment efficacy and minimize unnecessary side effects thus enhancing overall patients’ quality of life.

References

 

 

1. (2024, September 30). 14 risk factors that may help prevent or delay dementia. AARP. https://www.aarp.org/health/healthy-living/dementia-risk-factors/
2. Administration for Community Living. (2024). Eldercare Locator. https://eldercare.acl.gov
3. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2021). Fall TIPS: A patient-centered fall prevention toolkit. https://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/systems/hospital/fallpxtoolkit/index.html
4. Alzheimer’s & Dementia. (2021). Toward a theory‐based specification of non‐pharmacological treatments in aging and dementia: Focused reviews and methodological recommendations. https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.12188
5. Alzheimer’s Association. (2024). 2025 Alzheimer’s disease facts and figures. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 20(5), 3708-3821. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/facts-figures
6. Alzheimer’s Association. (2024). Communication. https://www.alz.org/help-support/caregiving/daily-care/communications
7. Alzheimer’s Association. (2024). Donanemab approved for treatment of early Alzheimer’s. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/treatments/donanemab
8. Alzheimer’s Association. (2024). Lecanemab approved for treatment of early Alzheimer’s. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/treatments/lecanemab-leqembi
9. Alzheimer’s Association. (2024). Revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer’s disease: Alzheimer’s Association Workgroup. https://www.alz.org/research/for_researchers/diagnostic-criteria-guidelines
10. Alzheimer’s Association. (2024). Revised criteria for diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer’s disease: Alzheimer’s Association Workgroup. https://www.alz.org/research/for_researchers/diagnostic-criteria-guidelines
11. Alzheimer’s Association. (2024). Treatments for behavior. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/treatments/treatments-for-behavior
12. Alzheimer’s Association. (2024). Types of dementia. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/what-is-dementia/types-of-dementia
13. Alzheimer’s Association. (2025). 2025 Alzheimer’s disease facts and figures. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 21(5), 3708-3821. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/facts-figures
14. Alzheimer’s Association. (2025). AUC for amyloid and tau PET imaging. https://www.alz.org/research/for_researchers/auc-amyloid-and-tau-pet
15. Alzheimer’s Association. (2025). Cognitive screening and assessment. https://www.alz.org/professionals/health-systems-medical-professionals/cognitive-assessment
16. Alzheimer’s Association. (2025). Medical tests for diagnosing Alzheimer’s & dementia. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/diagnosis/medical_tests
17. Alzheimer’s Association. (2025). Medical tests for diagnosing Alzheimer’s & dementia. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/diagnosis/medical_tests
18. Alzheimer’s Association. (2025). Medications for memory, cognition & dementia-related behaviors. https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/treatments/medications-for-memory
19. Alzheimer’s Disease International. (2024, July 31). Lancet Commission identifies two new risk factors for dementia and suggests 45% of cases could be delayed or reduced. Alzheimer’s Disease International. https://www.alzint.org/news-events/news/lancet-commission-identifies-two-new-risk-factors-for-dementia-and-suggests-45-of-cases-could-be-delayed-or-reduced/
20. Alzheimer’s Disease International. (2024). Donanemab update: New Alzheimer’s disease treatment approved by the FDA. https://www.alzint.org/news-events/news/donanemab-update-new-alzheimers-disease-treatment-approved-by-the-fda/
21. Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy. (2018). Comparative safety and effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine for Alzheimer’s disease: A network meta-analysis of 41 randomized controlled trials. https://alzres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13195-018-0457-9
22. Alzheimer’s Research & Therapy. (2024). Effects of intensive lifestyle changes on the progression of mild cognitive impairment or early dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: A randomized, controlled clinical trial. https://alzres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13195-024-01482-z
23. Alzheimer’s Society. (2024). FDA approves new Alzheimer’s disease drug donanemab in the US. https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/news/2024-07-03/fda-approves-new-alzheimers-disease-drug-donanemab-us
24. Alzheimer’s Society. (2024). Physical activity and the risk of dementia. Alzheimer’s Society. https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/about-dementia/managing-the-risk-of-dementia/reduce-your-risk-of-dementia/physical-activity
25. Alzheimer’s Society. (2024). Researching new drugs for Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/research/our-research/dementia-research-news/researching-new-drugs-alzheimers-disease
26. gov. (2025). Can I prevent dementia? https://www.alzheimers.gov/life-with-dementia/can-i-prevent-dementia
27. gov. (2025). Combination of healthy lifestyle traits may substantially reduce Alzheimer’s disease risk. https://www.alzheimers.gov/news/combination-healthy-lifestyle-traits-may-substantially-reduce-alzheimers-disease-risk
28. American Academy of Family Physicians. (2006). Cholinesterase inhibitors for Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/2006/0901/p747.html
29. American Academy of Family Physicians. (2017). Alzheimer disease: Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for cognitive and functional symptoms. https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/2017/0615/p771.html
30. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. (2023). Sleep disturbances and dementia risk in older adults: Findings from 10 years of national U.S. prospective data. https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(23)00009-0/fulltext
31. American Medical Association. (2016). The limits of informed consent for an overwhelmed patient: Clinicians’ role in protecting patients and preventing overwhelm. Journal of Ethics, 18(9), 869-886. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/limits-informed-consent-overwhelmed-patient-clinicians-role-protecting-patients-and-preventing/2016-09
32. American Medical Association. (2024). Consent, communication and decision making. AMA Code of Medical Ethics. https://code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org/chapters/consent-communication-decision-making
33. American Medical Association. (2025). “Robust pipeline” of new tests, treatments for Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/robust-pipeline-new-tests-treatments-alzheimer-s-disease
34. American Occupational Therapy Association. (2017). Occupational therapy interventions for people with Alzheimer’s disease. https://research.aota.org/ajot/article/72/1/7201390010p1/6404/Occupational-Therapy-Interventions-for-People-With
35. American Occupational Therapy Association. (2024). Occupational therapy practice guidelines for adults living with Alzheimer’s disease and related neurocognitive disorders. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10985123/
36. American Occupational Therapy Association. (2024). Occupational therapy practice guidelines for adults living with Alzheimer’s disease and related neurocognitive disorders. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10985123/
37. (2024). Portable medical orders (POLSTs) vs advance directives. National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization. https://www.caringinfo.org/planning/advance-directives/polsts-are-portable-medical-orders/
38. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024). Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). https://www.cdc.gov/phlp/php/resources/health-insurance-portability-and-accountability-act-of-1996-hipaa.html
39. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025, February 18). About Alzheimer’s | Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/alzheimers-dementia/about/alzheimers.html
40. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025, February 18). About Alzheimer’s. Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia. https://www.cdc.gov/alzheimers-dementia/about/alzheimers.html
41. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025, February 3). About dementia. Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia. https://www.cdc.gov/alzheimers-dementia/about/index.html
42. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). About Alzheimer’s | Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. https://www.cdc.gov/alzheimers-dementia/about/alzheimers.html
43. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). About Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. https://www.cdc.gov/alzheimers-dementia/about/alzheimers.html
44. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). Caregivers of a person with Alzheimer’s disease or a related dementia. https://www.cdc.gov/caregiving/about/index.html
45. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). Dementia caregiving as a public health strategy. https://www.cdc.gov/caregiving/php/public-health-strategy/index.html
46. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). Helping dementia caregivers. https://www.cdc.gov/caregiving/resources/helping-alzheimers-caregivers.html
47. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). Signs and symptoms of Alzheimer’s | Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. https://www.cdc.gov/alzheimers-dementia/signs-symptoms/alzheimers.html
48. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2025). Signs and symptoms of dementia | Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. https://www.cdc.gov/alzheimers-dementia/signs-symptoms/index.html
49. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2024). Cognitive assessment coverage. https://www.medicare.gov/coverage/cognitive-assessment-care-plan-services
50. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2024). Medicare and Medicaid benefits for people with dementia. https://www.cms.gov/outreach-and-education/american-indian-alaska-native/aian/downloads/medicare-and-medicaid-benefits-for-people-with-dementia.pdf
51. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. (2024). Hospice care coverage. Medicare.gov. https://www.medicare.gov/coverage/hospice-care
52. Cleveland Clinic. (2017). Alzheimer’s disease: Symptoms & treatment. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/9164-alzheimers-disease
53. Cleveland Clinic. (2024). Neurodegenerative diseases: What they are & types. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/24976-neurodegenerative-diseases
54. Creyos Health. (2025). Beyond the MoCA test: How to improve early dementia detection. https://creyos.com/blog/moca-test
55. Current Therapeutics for Alzheimer’s Disease. (2024). Current therapeutics for Alzheimer’s disease and clinical trials. https://www.explorationpub.com/Journals/en/Article/100648
56. Desai, A. K., & Grossberg, G. T. (2017). Behavioral approaches in dementia care. Practical Neurology. https://practicalneurology.com/diseases-diagnoses/alzheimer-disease-dementias/behavioral-approaches-in-dementia-care/31800/
57. Dodge, H. H., et al. (2024). Internet-based conversational engagement clinical trial (I-CONECT) among socially isolated older adults with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment: Randomized controlled trial. The Gerontologist, 64(2), gnad147. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11692696/
58. Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation. (2025). Clinical stages of Alzheimer’s. https://www.alzinfo.org/understand-alzheimers/clinical-stages-of-alzheimers/
59. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. (2021). Brain morphometry and cognitive performance in normal brain aging: Age- and sex-related structural and functional changes. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2021.713680/full
60. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. (2022). Amyloid and tau positron emission tomography imaging in Alzheimer’s disease and other tauopathies. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2022.838034/full
61. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. (2023). Current and future therapeutic strategies for Alzheimer’s disease: An overview of drug development bottlenecks. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2023.1206572/full
62. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. (2023). Physical activity and lifestyle modifications in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2023.1185671/full
63. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. (2025). Non-pharmacological treatment of Alzheimer’s disease: An update. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2025.1527242/full
64. Frontiers in Neurology. (2018). The multidisciplinary approach to Alzheimer’s disease and dementia: A narrative review of non-pharmacological treatment. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neurology/articles/10.3389/fneur.2018.01058/full
65. Frontiers in Neuroscience. (2019). Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2019.00472/full
66. Frontiers in Psychiatry. (2022). Non-pharmacological interventions for behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1039752/full
67. Gitlin, L. N., & Kales, H. C. (2012). Managing behavioral symptoms in dementia using nonpharmacologic approaches: An overview. Journal of the American Medical Association, 308(19), 2020-2029. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3711645/
68. Hopper, T. (2001). Methods to enhance verbal communication between individuals with Alzheimer’s disease and their formal and informal caregivers: A systematic review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2925413/
69. International Working Group. (2024). International Working Group publishes revised diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.alzheimer-europe.org/news/international-working-group-publishes-revised-diagnostic-criteria-alzheimers-disease
70. Jelčić, N., Čuković-Bagić, I., Sorić, T., Grzić, R., Friganović-Mustapić, Ž., & Kovač, Z. (2014). Communication difficulties as a result of dementia. Materia Socio-Medica, 26(4), 221-224. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6195406/
71. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. (2025, February 24). Small amounts of moderate to vigorous physical activity are associated with big reductions in dementia risk. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2025/small-amounts-of-moderate-to-vigorous-physical-activity-are-associated-with-big-reductions-in-dementia-risk
72. Journal of Biomedical Science. (2020). Clinical trials of new drugs for Alzheimer disease. https://jbiomedsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12929-019-0609-7
73. Journal of the Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease. (2024). Diagnostic biomarkers of amyloid and tau pathology in Alzheimer’s disease: An overview of tests for clinical practice in the United States and Europe. https://www.jpreventionalzheimer.com/7225-diagnostic-biomarkers-of-amyloid-and-tau-pathology-in-alzheimers-disease-an-overview-of-tests-for-clinical-practice-in-the-united-states-and-europe.html
74. Kales, H. C., Gitlin, L. N., & Lyketsos, C. G. (2014). Nonpharmacologic management of behavioral symptoms in dementia. Journal of the American Medical Association, 312(10), 1047-1048. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23168825/
75. Kumar, A., et al. (2018). Impact of social relationships on Alzheimer’s memory impairment: Mechanistic studies. Journal of Biomedical Science, 25(1), 3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5764000/
76. Kumar, A., Sidhu, J., Lui, F., & Tsao, J. W. (2024, February 12). Alzheimer disease. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499922/
77. Livingston, G., et al. (2022). Associations between social connections and cognition: A global collaborative individual participant data meta-analysis. The Lancet Healthy Longevity, 3(11), e740-e753. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9750173/
78. Marques-Aleixo, I., et al. (2020). Physical exercise in the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Current Pharmaceutical Design, 26(9), 946-965. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7498620/
79. Medical News Today. (2022). MoCA test for dementia: Results, diagnosis, and more. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/moca-test-for-dementia
80. Merck Manual. (2025). Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. Merck Manual Consumer Version. https://www.merckmanuals.com/home/fundamentals/legal-and-ethical-issues/do-not-resuscitate-dnr-orders
81. Molecular Psychiatry. (2021). Alzheimer’s disease profiled by fluid and imaging markers: tau PET best predicts cognitive decline. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-021-01263-2
82. Morris, M. C., et al. (2015). MIND diet associated with reduced incidence of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 11(9), 1007-1014. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4532650/
83. National Cancer Institute. (2024). myeloMATCH will test tailored treatments for AML and MDS. https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/press-releases/2024/myelomatch-precision-medicine-treatment-trial-launch
84. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. (2024). Clinical trials, today and tomorrow. https://ncats.nih.gov/about/director/june-2024
85. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (1997). The GDS/FAST staging system. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9447440/
86. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15817019/
87. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2008). Efficacy and safety of donepezil, galantamine, and rivastigmine for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2546466/
88. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2008). Staging dementia using Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes scores: A Texas Alzheimer’s Research Consortium study. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3409562/
89. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2008). Staging dementia using Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes scores: A Texas Alzheimer’s Research Consortium study. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3409562/
90. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2010). Mechanism of amyloid plaque formation suggests an intracellular basis of Aβ pathogenicity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2836607/
91. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2012). Approach to end of life care. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3399266/
92. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2012). Biochemistry and cell biology of tau protein in neurofibrillary degeneration. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3385935/
93. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2013). The cell and molecular biology of neurodegenerative diseases: An overview. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3843120/
94. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2014). Cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease: Getting on and staying on. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4052996/
95. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2014). The Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive-Plus (ADAS-Cog-Plus): An expansion of the ADAS-Cog to improve responsiveness in MCI. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3873823/
96. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2015). Detailed comparison of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for identifying early Alzheimer disease. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4607601/
97. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2015). Impact of sleep on the risk of cognitive decline and dementia. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4323377/
98. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2016). First Medicare demonstration of concurrent provision of curative and hospice services for end-of-life care. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4940650/
99. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2017). Cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine for dementia. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK536484/
100. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2017). Cognitive, functional and behavioral assessment: Alzheimer’s disease. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5619475/
101. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2017). Pathology of neurodegenerative diseases. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5495060/
102. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2017). Sleep, cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28364458/
103. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2018). Converging pathways in neurodegeneration, from genetics to mechanisms. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6278826/
104. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2018). The Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog): Modifications and responsiveness in pre-dementia populations. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5929311/
105. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2019). Brief cognitive screening instruments for early detection of Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review. https://alzres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13195-019-0474-3
106. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2019). Genomics-guided immunotherapy for precision medicine in cancer. Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals, 34(8), 487-497. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6802731/
107. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2019). The neuropathological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. https://molecularneurodegeneration.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13024-019-0333-5
108. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2020). Alzheimer’s disease: Etiology, neuropathology and pathogenesis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK566126/
109. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2020). Aβ plaques. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7745791/
110. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2020). Brain structure changes over time in normal and mildly impaired aged persons. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7321765/
111. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2020). Current and future treatments in Alzheimer disease: An update. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7050025/
112. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2020). Is tau in the absence of amyloid on the Alzheimer’s continuum. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7001143/
113. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2020). Sleep problems and risk of all-cause cognitive decline or dementia: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31879285/
114. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2020). The seven clinical stages of Alzheimer’s disease (Global Deterioration Scale). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK566126/table/Ch1-t0001/
115. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2021). Alzheimer’s disease: Epidemiology and clinical progression. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9095793/
116. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2021). Personalized immunotherapy in cancer precision medicine. Cancer Biology & Medicine, 18(4), 955-965. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34369137/
117. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2021). Principles of clinical ethics and their application to practice. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7923912/
118. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2021). Role of amyloid-β and tau proteins in Alzheimer’s disease: Confuting the amyloid cascade. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8371153/
119. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2021). Tauvid™: The first FDA-approved PET tracer for imaging tau pathology in Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7911942/
120. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2022). Alzheimer’s disease: Learn more – Non-drug interventions for Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279355/
121. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2022). Diet in the prevention of Alzheimer’s disease: Current knowledge and future research requirements. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9656789/
122. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2022). Major neurocognitive disorder (dementia). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557444/
123. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2022). Pathophysiology of neurodegenerative diseases: An interplay among axonal transport failure, oxidative stress, and inflammation. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9807734/
124. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2022). Patient autonomy, clinical decision making, and the phenomenological reduction. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9613716/
125. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2022). Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status and its relationship to biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9271322/
126. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2022). The central role of tau in Alzheimer’s disease: From neurofibrillary tangle maturation to the induction of cell death. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36244581/
127. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Amyloidosis in Alzheimer’s disease: Pathogeny, etiology, and related therapeutic directions. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8876037/
128. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). An insight into cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis of neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s disease. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37239068/
129. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Biochemical and molecular pathways in neurodegenerative diseases: An integrated view. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10527779/
130. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease: Role in early and differential diagnosis and recognition of atypical variants. https://alzres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13195-023-01314-6
131. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Clinical trials of new drugs for Alzheimer disease: A 2020–2023 update. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10544555/
132. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Competency and capacity. StatPearls. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532862/
133. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Diet and lifestyle impact the development and progression of Alzheimer’s dementia. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10344607/
134. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Hallmarks of brain aging: Adaptive and pathological modification by metabolic states. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6039826/
135. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Impact of diet and exercise interventions on cognition and brain health in older adults: A narrative review. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10255782/
136. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Mechanisms underlying brain aging under normal and pathological conditions. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9905409/
137. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Normal aging induces changes in the brain and neurodegeneration progress: Review of the structural, biochemical, metabolic, cellular, and molecular changes. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9281621/
138. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). Structural brain changes in aging: courses, causes and cognitive consequences. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20879692/
139. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2023). The brain chart of aging: Machine learning analytics reveals links between brain aging, white matter disease, amyloid burden and cognition in the iSTAGING consortium. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7923395/
140. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024, February 12). Alzheimer disease. StatPearls. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499922/
141. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Alzheimer disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499922/
142. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Alzheimer disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499922/
143. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Alzheimer disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499922/
144. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Brain structure ages—A new biomarker for multi-disease classification. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10785199/
145. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Clinical applications and therapeutic potentials of advanced nanoparticles: A comprehensive review on completed human clinical trials. Frontiers in Nanotechnology. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/nanotechnology/articles/10.3389/fnano.2024.1479993/full
146. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Enhancing precision in cancer treatment: The role of gene therapy and immune modulation in oncology. Frontiers in Medicine, 11. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.2024.1527600/full
147. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Informed consent. StatPearls. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430827/
148. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Lecanemab and donanemab as therapies for Alzheimer’s disease: An illustrated perspective on the data. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11218032/
149. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Next-generation immunotherapy: Advancing clinical applications in cancer treatment. Biomedicines, 12(11). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11546714/
150. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Parkinson’s disease drug therapies in the clinical trial pipeline: 2024 update. Journal of Parkinson’s Disease, 10(3). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11307066/
151. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Patient rights and ethics. StatPearls. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538279/
152. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Precision nanomedicine: Navigating the tumor microenvironment for enhanced cancer immunotherapy and targeted drug delivery. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12131435/
153. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Recent advances in Alzheimer’s disease research: From biomarkers to therapeutic frontiers. Biomedicines, 12(12). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11673907/
154. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Revised criteria for the diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer’s disease. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11630478/
155. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Revolutionizing personalized medicine: Synergy with multi-omics data generation, main hurdles, and future perspectives. Biomedicines, 12(12). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11673561/
156. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2024). Sleep biomarkers for predicting cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38043016/
157. National Center for Biotechnology Information. (2025). Sleep disorders increase the risk of dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and cognitive decline: A meta-analysis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40214959/
158. National Council on Aging. (2024). What does Medicare cover for Alzheimer’s disease? https://www.ncoa.org/article/what-does-medicare-cover-for-alzheimers-disease/
159. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. (2024). Dementias. https://www.ninds.nih.gov/health-information/disorders/dementias
160. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. (2024). Dementias. https://www.ninds.nih.gov/health-information/disorders/dementias
161. National Institute on Aging. (2021, March 3). Study reveals how APOE4 gene may increase risk for dementia. National Institute on Aging. https://www.nia.nih.gov/news/study-reveals-how-apoe4-gene-may-increase-risk-dementia
162. National Institute on Aging. (2021). Alzheimer’s and related dementias: Dementia care and caregiver support research. https://www.nia.nih.gov/2021-2022-alzheimers-disease-related-dementias-scientific-advances/dementia-care-and-caregiver
163. National Institute on Aging. (2023). Advancing care and caregiving research. https://www.nia.nih.gov/about/2024-nih-dementia-research-progress-report/advancing-care-caregiving-research
164. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Advance care planning: Advance directives for health care. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/advance-care-planning/advance-care-planning-advance-directives-health-care
165. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Alzheimer’s caregiving: Caring for yourself. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-caregiving/alzheimers-caregiving-caring-yourself
166. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Alzheimer’s caregiving: Managing personality and behavior changes. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-changes-behavior-and-communication/alzheimers-caregiving-managing-personality-and
167. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Alzheimer’s disease fact sheet. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/alzheimers-disease-fact-sheet
168. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Alzheimer’s disease fact sheet. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/alzheimers-disease-fact-sheet
169. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Alzheimer’s disease fact sheet. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/alzheimers-disease-fact-sheet
170. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Alzheimer’s disease genetics fact sheet. National Institute on Aging. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-causes-and-risk-factors/alzheimers-disease-genetics-fact-sheet
171. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Getting your affairs in order checklist: Documents to prepare for the future. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/advance-care-planning/getting-your-affairs-order-checklist-documents-prepare-future
172. National Institute on Aging. (2024). How is Alzheimer’s disease treated? https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-treatment/how-alzheimers-disease-treated
173. National Institute on Aging. (2024). How the aging brain affects thinking. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/brain-health/how-aging-brain-affects-thinking
174. National Institute on Aging. (2024). Preparing a living will. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/advance-care-planning/preparing-living-will
175. National Institute on Aging. (2024). What are palliative care and hospice care? https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/hospice-and-palliative-care/what-are-palliative-care-and-hospice-care
176. National Institute on Aging. (2024). What causes Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-causes-and-risk-factors/what-causes-alzheimers-disease
177. National Institute on Aging. (2024). What do we know about diet and prevention of Alzheimer’s disease? National Institute on Aging. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/what-do-we-know-about-diet-and-prevention-alzheimers-disease
178. National Institute on Aging. (2024). What happens to the brain in Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-causes-and-risk-factors/what-happens-brain-alzheimers-disease
179. National Institute on Aging. (2024). What happens to the brain in Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-causes-and-risk-factors/what-happens-brain-alzheimers-disease
180. National Institute on Aging. (2024). What is dementia? Symptoms, types, and diagnosis. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/what-dementia-symptoms-types-and-diagnosis
181. National Institute on Aging. (2024). What is dementia. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/what-dementia-symptoms-types-and-diagnosis
182. National Institute on Aging. (2025). 2025 NIH Alzheimer’s and related dementias research progress report: Advances and achievements. https://www.nia.nih.gov/about/2025-nih-dementia-research-progress-report
183. National Institute on Aging. (2025). Alzheimer’s disease fact sheet. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/alzheimers-disease-fact-sheet
184. National Institute on Aging. (2025). How is Alzheimer’s disease diagnosed? https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-symptoms-and-diagnosis/how-alzheimers-disease-diagnosed
185. National Institute on Aging. (2025). NIA-funded active Alzheimer’s and related dementias clinical trials and studies. https://www.nia.nih.gov/research/ongoing-AD-trials
186. National Institute on Aging. (2025). What do we know about diet and prevention of Alzheimer’s disease? https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/alzheimers-and-dementia/what-do-we-know-about-diet-and-prevention-alzheimers-disease
187. National Institutes of Health. (2020). Combination of healthy lifestyle traits may substantially reduce Alzheimer’s. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/combination-healthy-lifestyle-traits-may-substantially-reduce-alzheimers
188. National Institutes of Health. (2024, September 20). Study defines major genetic form of Alzheimer’s disease. NIH Research Matters. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/study-defines-major-genetic-form-alzheimers-disease
189. National Institutes of Health. (2024). NIH adds funds to Long COVID research, advances work on new clinical trials. RECOVER COVID Initiative. https://recovercovid.org/news/nih-adds-funds-long-covid-research-advances-work-new-clinical-trials
190. National Institutes of Health. (2024). Providing care and comfort at the end of life. National Institute on Aging. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/end-life/providing-care-and-comfort-end-life
191. National Institutes of Health. (2024). Selected research advances. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/about/accomplishments/annualadvances/2024
192. National Institutes of Health. (2025). End-of-life care: What to expect and how to plan. NIH MedlinePlus Magazine. https://magazine.medlineplus.gov/article/end-of-life-care-what-to-expect-and-how-to-plan
193. National Institutes of Health. (2025). Viagra associated with reduced risk of Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/viagra-associated-reduced-risk-alzheimers-disease
194. National POLST. (2023). POLST: Portable medical orders for seriously ill or frail individuals. https://polst.org/
195. National Research Council. (2004). Social engagement and cognition. In When I’m 64. National Academies Press. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK83766/
196. Nature Medicine. (2024). Highly accurate blood test for Alzheimer’s disease is similar or superior to clinical cerebrospinal fluid tests. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-02869-z
197. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery. (2024). FDA approves third anti-amyloid antibody for Alzheimer disease. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41573-024-00116-1
198. (2022). Brain charts for the human lifespan. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04554-y
199. New England Journal of Medicine. (2023). Lecanemab in early Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2212948
200. New York State Department of Health. (2024). Where can I get help? Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias. https://www.health.ny.gov/diseases/conditions/dementia/help.htm
201. Patterson, R., et al. (2022). Physical activity as a protective factor for dementia and Alzheimer’s disease: Systematic review, meta-analysis and quality assessment of cohort and case-control studies. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 56(12), 701-709. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35301183/
202. Practical Neurology. (2024). Blood-based biomarkers in Alzheimer disease: Clinical implementation and limitations. https://practicalneurology.com/articles/2024-mar/blood-based-biomarkers-in-alzheimer-disease-clinical-implementation-and-limitations
203. ScienceDirect Topics. (2024). Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale – an overview. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/alzheimer-disease-assessment-scale
204. ScienceDirect Topics. (2024). Montreal Cognitive Assessment – an overview. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/montreal-cognitive-assessment
205. (2016). Non-pharmacological interventions for people with Alzheimer’s disease: A critical review of the scientific literature from the last ten years. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1878764916000048
206. Sebastian, S. A., et al. (2025, January 11). The role of the Mediterranean diet in reducing the risk of cognitive impairment, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease: A meta-analysis. GeroScience. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11357-024-01488-3
207. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy. (2024). Recent advances in Alzheimer’s disease: Mechanisms, clinical trials and new drug development strategies. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41392-024-01911-3
208. Sink, K. M., Holden, K. F., & Yaffe, K. (2005). Recognition and management of behavioral disturbances in dementia. Primary Care, 32(3), 661-684. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC181170/
209. Society for Neuroscience. (2019). How the brain changes with age. https://www.brainfacts.org/thinking-sensing-and-behaving/aging/2019/how-the-brain-changes-with-age-083019
210. Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. (2025). Updated appropriate use criteria for amyloid and tau PET: A report from the Alzheimer’s Association and Society for Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Workgroup. https://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/early/2025/01/07/jnumed.124.268756
211. Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. (2025). Updated appropriate use criteria for amyloid and tau PET: A report from the Alzheimer’s Association and Society for Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Workgroup. https://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/early/2025/01/07/jnumed.124.268756
212. Stanford Longevity Center. (2024, June 5). How exercise reduces risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Stanford Longevity Center. https://longevity.stanford.edu/lifestyle/2024/05/28/how-exercise-reduces-risk-of-alzheimers-disease/
213. Teri, L., Gibbons, L. E., McCurry, S. M., Logsdon, R. G., Buchner, D. M., Barlow, W. E., Kukull, W. A., LaCroix, A. Z., McCormick, W., & Larson, E. B. (2003). Evidence-based interventions to improve quality of life for individuals with dementia. The Gerontologist, 43(4), 547-555. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2585781/
214. S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2024). Privacy. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/index.html
215. S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2024). Tips for caregivers and families of people with dementia. Alzheimers.gov. https://www.alzheimers.gov/life-with-dementia/tips-caregivers
216. S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2025). Individuals’ right under HIPAA to access their health information. https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/access/index.html
217. S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2025). Summary of the HIPAA Privacy Rule. https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html
218. S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2025). Your rights under HIPAA. https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-individuals/guidance-materials-for-consumers/index.html
219. S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). FDA approves treatment for adults with Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/news-events-human-drugs/fda-approves-treatment-adults-alzheimers-disease
220. S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). FDA converts novel Alzheimer’s disease treatment to traditional approval. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-converts-novel-alzheimers-disease-treatment-traditional-approval
221. University of California San Francisco Memory and Aging Center. (2024). Healthy aging versus diagnosis. https://memory.ucsf.edu/symptoms/healthy-aging
222. University of Miami. (2000). Decision-making, autonomy, valid consent and guardianship. Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy. https://bioethics.miami.edu/education/ethics-curricula/geriatrics-and-ethics/decision-making-autonomy-valid-consent-and-guardianship/index.html
223. World Health Organization. (2025). Dementia. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dementia