Münchener Kardiologe erhält den diesjährigen Präventionspreis der DGIM: Bei wem…
AUSSCHREIBUNG: OTSUKA TEAM AWARD PSYCHIATRY+ 2020
Jetzt um den bytes4diabetes-Award 2021 bewerben
Bayer verleiht PHILOS-Preis an Wegbegleiter von Menschen mit Hämophilie
bytes4diabetes-Awards 2020 gehen an vier innovative Digital-Projekte
Deutscher Pflegetag und Zukunftsforum Geburtshilfe am 11.-12. November 2020
Virtueller DIVI-Kongress ist ein Novum für 6.000 Teilnehmer
Safeguards needed to prevent discrimination of early Alzheimer’s patients in the workplace
Policies needed to prepare individuals, society for earlier diagnosis and high risk of Alzheimer’s
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA (September 15, 2011) – The changing tide of Alzheimer’s diagnosis presents new challenges to the public, physicians and lawmakers: if you could find out your Alzheimer’s risk, would you want to know? How should doctors tell you your risk? And what does it mean for the many newly diagnosed Americans still in the workplace?
Despite the emergence of new tools that can diagnose Alzheimer’s earlier, no effective interventions have been identified to stop the progression of the disease. A new report from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania tackles the ethical and logistical challenges of safely and effectively communicating a diagnosis of pre-clinical Alzheimer’s disease in light of the gulf between diagnosis and treatment. The study appears in the October 11 print edition of Neurology.
Alzheimer’s disease is among the most feared diseases of aging. The disease has been known for its role in memory loss and other clinical symptoms. But increasingly, patients learn they have the disease before symptoms start impacting their ability to function in daily life.
"We need to develop systems now, to navigate the challenges of a pre-clinical Alzheimer’s diagnosis," said Jason Karlawish, MD, Professor of Medicine and Medical Ethics, author of the paper and leading voice on the ethics of Alzheimer’s. "It’s only a matter of time before we are able identify Alzheimer’s before the patient is ill, like we’ve done with cholesterol and heart disease. Given the unique nature of this disease, which strips people of their independence as the disease progresses, safeguards are needed to protect those at high risk or with a pre-clinical diagnosis."
On the individual level, people strongly differ in their desire to know their risk and will react differently to a high Alzheimer’s risk score or diagnosis in the early stages of the disease. In some cases, biomarker test results can be harmful; patients may develop anxiety or serious depression. To safely and effectively communicate a diagnosis of pre-clinical Alzheimer’s disease, Dr. Karlawish recommends that researchers and clinicians track the emotional and physical impact of a pre-clinical diagnosis, then develop and disseminate best practices.
When an effective Alzheimer’s therapy or intervention is found, a process will be necessary to ensure the patients who stand to benefit most are prioritized accordingly. Both prognostic and predictive evidence should be gauged against not only an individual’s risk but the entire population at risk, especially if failure to intervene could cause large numbers of people to be impacted by any disease progression. A "National Alzheimer’s Education Program" is proposed, to address how to translate research results into clinical practice for those with pre-clinical disease.
"The Alzheimer’s disease label does not equate to disability," said Dr. Karlawish. In order to ensure that patients’ daily lives (i.e. driving, financial planning, work status) aren’t negatively or prematurely limited, laws and policies need to be revised to prevent stigma, discrimination and, when patients do suffer disability, exploitation.
"The discovery of pre-clinical Alzheimer’s disease may be how we prevent the tsunami of Alzheimer’s disease dementia, but we must not drown in the challenges created by our own discovery," warned Dr. Karlawish.
The study was sponsored by the Marian S. Ware Alzheimer Program and a Robert Wood Johnson Investigator Award in Health Policy Research.
Penn Medicine is one of the world’s leading academic medical centers, dedicated to the related missions of medical education, biomedical research, and excellence in patient care. Penn Medicine consists of the Raymond and Ruth Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania (founded in 1765 as the nation’s first medical school) and the University of Pennsylvania Health System, which together form a $4 billion enterprise.
Penn’s Perelman School of Medicine is currently ranked #2 in U.S. News & World Report’s survey of research-oriented medical schools and among the top 10 schools for primary care. The School is consistently among the nation’s top recipients of funding from the National Institutes of Health, with $507.6 million awarded in the 2010 fiscal year.
The University of Pennsylvania Health System’s patient care facilities include: The Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania — recognized as one of the nation’s top 10 hospitals by U.S. News & World Report; Penn Presbyterian Medical Center; and Pennsylvania Hospital – the nation’s first hospital, founded in 1751. Penn Medicine also includes additional patient care facilities and services throughout the Philadelphia region.
Penn Medicine is committed to improving lives and health through a variety of community-based programs and activities. In fiscal year 2010, Penn Medicine provided $788 million to benefit our community.
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 15.09.2011 (tB).