Validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and the HIV Dementia Scale in the assessment of cognitive impairment in HIV-1 infected patients.

The gold standard for evaluating cognitive impairments in HIV-infected patients is to administer an extensive neuropsychological assessment. This may, however, be time-consuming and hence not always feasible in the clinic. Therefore, several brief screening tools have been developed. This study determined the validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the HIV Dementia Scale (HDS) in detecting cognitive impairment using both the Frascati and cognitive impairment, no dementia (CIND) criteria to classify cognitive impairment in HIV-1 infected patients. The MoCA, HDS, and an extensive neuropsychological assessment, covering nine cognitive domains, were administered in a group of 102 HIV-infected patients who were all on cART and virologically suppressed for at least 1 year. Results show that the areas under the curve (AUCs) for both the MoCA and the HDS were statistically significant, using both the Frascati and the CIND criteria as gold standard. However, the AUCs for the MoCA and HDS did not differ significantly, regardless of the used classification criteria (Frascati: z = 0.37, p = 0.35; CIND: z = -0.62, p = 0.27). Sensitivity of both the MoCA and HDS were low for the recommended cutoff scores (Frascati: MoCA (<26) = 0.56, HDS (<11) = 0.26; CIND: MoCA (<26) = 0.55, HDS (<11) = 0.36). Cutoff scores with good sensitivity and adequate specificity could not be determined for both screening instruments. Therefore, the HDS and MoCA are not recommended as sole instruments to diagnose HIV-associated cognitive impairment.

A case-control pilot study on cognitive functioning, symptom validity and psychological wellbeing in HIV-1-infected patients in the Netherlands.

The objective of this study was to examine and relate both cognitive functioning and psychological wellbeing in Dutch HIV-1-infected patients (n = 30) in comparison with a matched healthy control group (n = 30), taking symptom validity into account. Significant differences in performance between patients and controls were found in the domain Working memory (P = 0.036), but not in the other cognitive domains. There was a significant difference in all dimensions of the psychological wellbeing scale, measured with the SCL-90-R (P values between 0.002 and 0.023), except for agoraphobia, cognitive performance difficulty and sleep disturbances. No correlations were found between the performance on the Working memory domain and wellbeing. Future research should focus on unravelling the underlying mechanisms of neurocognitive dysfunction further using neuropsychological tests, including a symptom validity test in combination with neuroimaging techniques in larger samples.