An interventional study of Individualized Cognitive Training and No-Contact Control in HIV-Associated Cognitive Motor Complex, Aging and Cognitive Impairment, sponsored by University of Alabama at Birmingham. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 40 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-10-19.
Sponsored by University of Alabama at Birmingham · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Over 50% of adults with HIV have some form of HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder (HAND) which represents a significant symptom that interferes with everyday functioning and quality of life. As adults age with HIV, they are more likely to develop comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and insulin resistance which will further contribute to poorer cognitive functioning and HAND. Based upon the Frascati criteria, HAND is diagnosed when a person performs less than 1 to 2 SD below their normative mean (education \& age) on measures of two or more cognitive domains (e.g., attention, speed of processing, verbal memory, executive functioning). Yet, from the cognitive literature and prior studies, administering certain computerized cognitive training programs may improve specific cognitive domains in older adults and those with HIV. Such cognitive training programs may be effective in older adults with HIV and therefore investigators may be able to change the diagnosis of HAND in such cognitively vulnerable adults. In this pre-post experimental study, 146 older adults (50+) with HAND will be randomized to be in either: 1) the Individualied-Targeted Cognitive Training, or 2) a no-contact control group. The investigators will focus on those cognitive domains in which participants express an impairment and train them with the corresponding cognitive program. Such an Individualized-Targeted Cognitive Training approach using standard cognitive training programs may offer hope and symptom relief to those individuals diagnosed with HAND. Furthermore, these changes may result in improved everyday functioning (e.g., IADLs) and quality of life. This approach represents a paradigm shift in possibly changing the way HAND is examined. Specific Aim 1: Compare adults who do receive Individualized-Targeted Cognitive Training to those who do not in order to determine whether a change in HAND prevalence and severity occurs between groups. Exploratory Aim 1: Compare adults who do receive individualized-targeted cognitive training to those who do not in order to determine whether this improves everyday functioning (e.g., IADLs). Exploratory Aim 2: Determine whether improvements in HAND and/or everyday functioning over time mediate improvements in quality of life.
This research directly meets the goals of the NIH Cognitive and Emotional Health Project and the Healthy Brain Initiative which seek to "maintain or improve the cognitive performance of all adults," especially for "populations experiencing the greatest disparities and risks in cognitive health."
Significance: Using the Frascati criteria, 52% - 59% of people with HIV experience some form of HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder (HAND) which affects medication adherence, instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), and even mood maintenance and quality of life. By 2020, 70% of adults with HIV in the United States will be 50 and older; thus, cognitive aging in this group represents a major concern. In a prior study (R03MH076642-01A2) conducted in the HAART era, when comparing cognitive functioning between older and younger HIV-positive and HIV-negative adults, older adults with HIV performed the worst. In the HAART era, these cognitive impairments continue to be observed in several cognitive domains including memory, learning, executive functioning, and speed of processing.
Regrettably, few behavioral interventions aimed at improving cognition in this pharmacologically-burdened population have been attempted. Pharmacological interventions have short-lived effects, if any, and can produce adverse side effects in a population prone to multiple comorbidities. Fortunately, computerized cognitive training interventions have been shown to improve cognition without adverse side-effects. Yet, only two types of computerized cognitive training interventions have been studied in adults with HIV. Becker and colleagues partially randomized 60 adults with HIV and without HIV to engage in 14 computerized targeted modules (e.g., knowledge, memory) over 24 weeks. No significant effects were found; however, adherence was poor. In a prior study, investigators randomized 46 adults to either a speed of processing training (10 hrs of training) group or a no-contact control group. Adherence was excellent and improvements were observed on this cognitive domain which transferred to an everyday functioning task.
Despite this lack of cognitive training studies in HIV, studies in older adults have shown their efficacy in improving specific cognitive abilities, some as much as 1-1.5 standard deviations (SD) above baseline performance or age/education-based norms. Using Frascati criteria, HAND is diagnosed when a person performs at least 1 to 2 SD below their normative mean on measures of two or more cognitive domains (e.g., verbal memory, speed of processing, executive functioning); yet many individuals may be only a fraction of a SD below the cut off. A meta-analysis of 52 cognitive training studies indicated the average cognitive improvement following cognitive training was 0.22 SD. Although this seems to be a small to moderate effect size, such cognitive training programs can change the diagnosis of HAND for some by improving cognitive performance to within acceptable performance norms. In this study, older adults (50+) with HAND will be enrolled to determine which cognitive domains are attributable to their diagnosis. Then those cognitive domains in which they have impairments will be targeted for training with the corresponding cognitive program. Such a tailored approach to standard cognitive training programs may offer hope and symptom relief to those individuals diagnosed with HAND. Furthermore, these changes may result in improved everyday functioning and quality of life. This approach also represents a paradigm shift in changing the way clinicians and researchers look at HAND in that this is not a static "progressive" diagnosis; Antinori et al. observed a 20% fluctuation of HAND over as little as 1 year, with some improving or declining in their cognitive performance. Such fluctuations, at least partially, reflect positive neuroplasticity that can be manipulated with cognitive training to improve cognition which can improve medication adherence and other IADLs. This study will use a basic two group pre-post experimental design of 146 adults with HAND.
41 studies on the registry are indexed under AIDS Dementia Complex; 2 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 109 is above the median of 50 across 31 interventional studies indexed under AIDS Dementia Complex.
Browse AIDS Dementia Complex studies →University of Alabama at Birmingham is the lead sponsor of 1,421 studies on the registry; 277 are open to participants now.
Of its 164 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 130 (79%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
The human immunodeficiency virus, which weakens the immune system.
Many studies now accept people whose HIV is controlled on treatment, judged by the viral load and the CD4 count. Check the limits this study sets.
HIV
The human immunodeficiency virus, which weakens the immune system.
Many studies now accept people whose HIV is controlled on treatment, judged by the viral load and the CD4 count. Check the limits this study sets.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Participants randomized to this arm will receive 20 hours of computerized cognitive training in the two predominate cognitive domains in which they experience deficits that contribute to their HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder diagnosis.
Behavioral: Individualized Cognitive Training
Participants in this arm will not receive any experimental or sham contact. They will only participate in the Baseline and Posttest assessments.
Other: No-Contact Control
These are specific computerized exercises that are designed to improve performance in particular cognitive domains (e.g., attention, speed of processing, verbal learning/memory).
Also known as: Insight Software
This is simply a no-contact control group. Participants in this group will receive no additional contact with the study beyond the baseline and posttest assessments.
Also known as: Control Group
Prevalence and Severity of HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder (HAND) as Measured by Neurocognitive Tests Interpreted by the Frascati Criteria
Compare adults who do receive Individualized-Targeted Cognitive Training to those who do not in order to determine whether a change in HAND prevalence and severity occurs between groups. A battery of neurocognitive tests (e.g., Trails Making Test A, Trails Making Test B, etc.) of different domains (e.g., speed of processing, verbal memory, etc.) are used which are normed by age/education which are then use with the Frascati Criteria (a neurological algorithm to classify cognitive impairment) to determine HIV-Associated Neurocognitive Disorder, both presence and severity (i.e., Global Severity Rating). This is administered at baseline and posttest.
Time frame: Per participants, approximately 10-12 weeks
Improvement on Everyday Functioning as Measured by the Timed Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Test
The Timed Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Test -- This test measures the accuracy and time it takes to perform 5 IADLs (e.g., counting out correct change, reading ingredients on a can of food). Slower speed of processing is associated with longer times to complete these tasks, even after adjusting for age, education level, depression, and general health. The time from each of the 5 IADLs is added together to form a composite score. Test-retest reliability is 0.64. This test is administered at baseline and posttest.
Time frame: Per participants, approximately 10-12 weeks
Improvement on Everyday Functioning as Measured by the Medication Adherence Scale
Medication Adherence - This IADL is measured by the Simplified Medication Adherence Questionnaire (as well as virological control). It consists of sixl items that ask about how consistently one takes his/her medications; the items can be summed to form a composite score. This measure is validated with virological outcomes and has good internal consistency (α = 0.75) and inter-observer agreement (88.2%). This questionnaire is administered at baseline and posttest.
Time frame: Per participants, approximately 10-12 weeks
Improvement in Quality of Life as Measured by Depression
Centers for Epidemiological Studies - Depression Scale (CES-D) - This depression scale measures how often (not at all - extremely) participants acknowledge 20 verbal symptoms of depression; score are tallied to form a composite score; higher scores indicate greater self-reported depressive symptomatology. Cronbach's α is very good at 0.88. This scale is administered at baseline and posttest.
Time frame: Per participants, approximately 10-12 weeks
Improvement in Quality of Life as Measured by Internal Locus of Control
Internal Locus of Control - This six (6-point Likert-type) item measure assesses the degree to which participants perceive that they can exert influence over their life. The items are summed to form a composite score; higher scores indicate more internal locus of control. Cronbach's α's range from 0.62 to 0.79. This measure is administered at baseline and posttest.
Time frame: Per participants, approximately 10-12 weeks
Improvement in Quality of Life as Measured by Health-Related Quality of Life
Medical Outcomes Study Short Form (SF-36)/Health-Related Quality of Life - SF-36 assesses health-related quality of life which is a subscale of this measure. The item of this subscale are summed to form a composite score. In the ACTIVE Study, improvement on this variable was observed in the speed of processing training group. Cronbach's α is greater than 0.85. This subscale is administered at baseline and posttest.
Time frame: Per participants, approximately 10-12 weeks
Improvement in Quality of Life as Measured by Self-Rated Health
Medical Outcomes Study Short Form (SF-36)/Self-Rated Health - SF-36 assesses self-rated health on only 1 item which is a Likert type scale (In general, I would say that my health is: Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, Poor). In the ACTIVE Study, improvement on self-rated health was observed in the speed of processing training group. This item is administered at baseline and posttest.
Time frame: Per participants, approximately 10-12 weeks
Improvement in Quality of Life as Measured by Cognitive Complaints
Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) - CFQ assesses common everyday cognitive complaints one may have such as in memory (e.g., "Do you forget where you put something like a newspaper or book?"). All of the 25 items on this measure are summed to form an overall composite score; higher scores are indicative of greater subjective cognitive complaints. This questionnaire is administered at baseline and posttest.
Time frame: Per participants, approximately 10-12 weeks
Plan to share: Undecided
Ran from Jul 2017 to primary completion in Feb 2019, 19 months.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Alabama at Birmingham →