Former professional American football players have a high relative risk for neurodegenerative diseases like chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). Interpreting low cognitive test scores in this population occasionally is complicated by performance on validity testing. Neuroimaging biomarkers may help inform whether a neurodegenerative disease is present in these situations. We report three cases of retired professional American football players who completed comprehensive neuropsychological testing, but “failed” performance validity tests, and underwent multimodal neuroimaging (structural MRI, Aß-PET, and tau-PET).

Three cases were identified from the Focused Neuroimaging for the Neurodegenerative Disease Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (FIND-CTE) study, an ongoing multimodal imaging study of retired National Football League players with complaints of progressive cognitive decline conducted at Boston University and the UCSF Memory and Aging Center. Participants were relatively young (age range 55-65), had 16 or more years of education, and two identified as Black/African American. Raw neuropsychological test scores were converted to demographically-adjusted z-scores. Testing included standalone (Test of Memory Malingering; TOMM) and embedded (reliable digit span, RDS) performance validity measures. Validity cutoffs were TOMM Trial 2 < 45 and RDS < 7. Structural MRIs were interpreted by trained neurologists. Aß-PET with Florbetapir was used to quantify cortical Aß deposition as global Centiloids (0 = mean cortical signal for a young, cognitively normal, Aß negative individual in their 20s, 100 = mean cortical signal for a patient with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease dementia). Tau-PET was performed with MK-6240 and first quantified as standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) map. The SUVR map was then converted to a w-score map representing signal intensity relative to a sample of demographically-matched healthy controls.

All performed in the average range on a word reading-based estimate of premorbid intellect. Contribution of Alzheimer’s disease pathology was ruled out in each case based on Centiloids quantifications < 0. All cases scored below cutoff on TOMM Trial 2 (Case #1=43, Case #2=42, Case #3=19) and Case #3 also scored well below RDS cutoff (2). Each case had multiple cognitive scores below expectations (z < -2.0) most consistently in memory, executive function, processing speed domains. For Case #1, MRI revealed mild atrophy in dorsal fronto-parietal and medial temporal lobe (MTL) regions and mild periventricular white matter disease. Tau-PET showed MTL tau burden modestly elevated relative to controls (regional w-score=0.59, 72nd%ile). For Case #2, MRI revealed cortical atrophy, mild hippocampal atrophy, and a microhemorrhage, with no evidence of meaningful tau-PET signal. For Case #3, MRI showed cortical atrophy and severe white matter disease, and tau-PET revealed significantly elevated MTL tau burden relative to controls (w-score=1.90, 97th%ile) as well as focal high signal in the dorsal frontal lobe (overall frontal region w-score=0.64, 74th%ile).

Low scores on performance validity tests complicate the interpretation of the severity of cognitive deficits, but do not negate the presence of true cognitive impairment or an underlying neurodegenerative disease. In the rapidly developing era of biomarkers, neuroimaging tools can supplement neuropsychological testing to help inform whether cognitive or behavioral changes are related to a neurodegenerative disease.

Item 9 of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) queries about thoughts of death and self-harm, but not suicidality. Although it is sometimes used to assess suicide risk, most positive responses are not associated with suicidality. The PHQ-8, which omits Item 9, is thus increasingly used in research. We assessed equivalency of total score correlations and the diagnostic accuracy to detect major depression of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9.

We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis. We fit bivariate random-effects models to assess diagnostic accuracy.

16 742 participants (2097 major depression cases) from 54 studies were included. The correlation between PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 scores was 0.996 (95% confidence interval 0.996 to 0.996). The standard cutoff score of 10 for the PHQ-9 maximized sensitivity + specificity for the PHQ-8 among studies that used a semi-structured diagnostic interview reference standard (N = 27). At cutoff 10, the PHQ-8 was less sensitive by 0.02 (−0.06 to 0.00) and more specific by 0.01 (0.00 to 0.01) among those studies (N = 27), with similar results for studies that used other types of interviews (N = 27). For all 54 primary studies combined, across all cutoffs, the PHQ-8 was less sensitive than the PHQ-9 by 0.00 to 0.05 (0.03 at cutoff 10), and specificity was within 0.01 for all cutoffs (0.00 to 0.01).

PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 total scores were similar. Sensitivity may be minimally reduced with the PHQ-8, but specificity is similar.

Determining infectious cross-transmission events in healthcare settings involves manual surveillance of case clusters by infection control personnel, followed by strain typing of clinical/environmental isolates suspected in said clusters. Recent advances in genomic sequencing and cloud computing now allow for the rapid molecular typing of infecting isolates.

To facilitate rapid recognition of transmission clusters, we aimed to assess infection control surveillance using whole-genome sequencing (WGS) of microbial pathogens to identify cross-transmission events for epidemiologic review.

Clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecium, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Klebsiella pneumoniae were obtained prospectively at an academic medical center, from September 1, 2016, to September 30, 2017. Isolate genomes were sequenced, followed by single-nucleotide variant analysis; a cloud-computing platform was used for whole-genome sequence analysis and cluster identification.

Most strains of the 4 studied pathogens were unrelated, and 34 potential transmission clusters were present. The characteristics of the potential clusters were complex and likely not identifiable by traditional surveillance alone. Notably, only 1 cluster had been suspected by routine manual surveillance.

Our work supports the assertion that integration of genomic and clinical epidemiologic data can augment infection control surveillance for both the identification of cross-transmission events and the inclusion of missed and exclusion of misidentified outbreaks (ie, false alarms). The integration of clinical data is essential to prioritize suspect clusters for investigation, and for existing infections, a timely review of both the clinical and WGS results can hold promise to reduce HAIs. A richer understanding of cross-transmission events within healthcare settings will require the expansion of current surveillance approaches.

Different diagnostic interviews are used as reference standards for major depression classification in research. Semi-structured interviews involve clinical judgement, whereas fully structured interviews are completely scripted. The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), a brief fully structured interview, is also sometimes used. It is not known whether interview method is associated with probability of major depression classification.

To evaluate the association between interview method and odds of major depression classification, controlling for depressive symptom scores and participant characteristics.

Data collected for an individual participant data meta-analysis of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) diagnostic accuracy were analysed and binomial generalised linear mixed models were fit.

A total of 17 158 participants (2287 with major depression) from 57 primary studies were analysed. Among fully structured interviews, odds of major depression were higher for the MINI compared with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) (odds ratio (OR) = 2.10; 95% CI = 1.15–3.87). Compared with semi-structured interviews, fully structured interviews (MINI excluded) were non-significantly more likely to classify participants with low-level depressive symptoms (PHQ-9 scores ≤6) as having major depression (OR = 3.13; 95% CI = 0.98–10.00), similarly likely for moderate-level symptoms (PHQ-9 scores 7–15) (OR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.56–1.66) and significantly less likely for high-level symptoms (PHQ-9 scores ≥16) (OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.26–0.97).

The MINI may identify more people as depressed than the CIDI, and semi-structured and fully structured interviews may not be interchangeable methods, but these results should be replicated.

Drs Jetté and Patten declare that they received a grant, outside the submitted work, from the Hotchkiss Brain Institute, which was jointly funded by the Institute and Pfizer. Pfizer was the original sponsor of the development of the PHQ-9, which is now in the public domain. Dr Chan is a steering committee member or consultant of Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Lilly, MSD and Pfizer. She has received sponsorships and honorarium for giving lectures and providing consultancy and her affiliated institution has received research grants from these companies. Dr Hegerl declares that within the past 3 years, he was an advisory board member for Lundbeck, Servier and Otsuka Pharma; a consultant for Bayer Pharma; and a speaker for Medice Arzneimittel, Novartis, and Roche Pharma, all outside the submitted work. Dr Inagaki declares that he has received grants from Novartis Pharma, lecture fees from Pfizer, Mochida, Shionogi, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo, Meiji Seika and Takeda, and royalties from Nippon Hyoron Sha, Nanzando, Seiwa Shoten, Igaku-shoin and Technomics, all outside of the submitted work. Dr Yamada reports personal fees from Meiji Seika Pharma Co., Ltd., MSD K.K., Asahi Kasei Pharma Corporation, Seishin Shobo, Seiwa Shoten Co., Ltd., Igaku-shoin Ltd., Chugai Igakusha and Sentan Igakusha, all outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests. No funder had any role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; preparation, review or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.