Psychological impact
The researchers have not looked at the psychological impact of negative findings on study participants, but they could do so at a later date.
“It would be very important to look into that given the potential to cause anxiety,” said Dr. Keuss. “It’s important to find out the potential negative consequences to inform researchers in future about how best to manage these findings.”
From blood tests, the analysis found that more than a third (34.6%) of participants had at least one related abnormality. The most common of these were kidney impairment (about 9%), thyroid function abnormalities (between 4% and 5%), anemia (about 4%), and low vitamin B12 levels (about 3%).
However, few of these reached the prespecified threshold for urgent action, and Dr. Keuss noted these findings were not the focus of her AAN presentation.
A strength of the study was that participants were almost the exact same age.
Important issue
Commenting on the research, David S. Liebeskind, MD, professor of neurology and director, Neurovascular Imaging Research Core, University of California, Los Angeles, said it raises “a very interesting” and “important” public health issue.
“The question is whether we do things based around individual symptomatic status, or at a larger level in terms of public health, screening the larger population to figure out who is at risk for any particular disease or disorder.”
From the standpoint of imaging technologies like MRI that show details about brain structures, experts debate whether the population should be screened “before something occurs,” said Dr. Liebeskind. “Imaging has the capacity to tell us a tremendous amount; whether this implies we should therefore image everybody is a larger public health question.”
The issue is “fraught with a lot of difficulty and complexity” as treatment paradigms tend to be “built around symptomatic status,” he said. “When we sit in the office or with a patient at the bedside, we usually focus on that individual patient and not necessarily on the larger public.”
Dr. Liebeskind noted that the question of whether to put the emphasis on the individual patient or the public at large is also being discussed during the current COVID-19 pandemic.
He wasn’t surprised that the study uncovered incidental findings in almost 5% of the sample. “If you take an 80-year-old and study their brain, a good chunk, if not half or more, will have some abnormality,” he said.
Drs. Keuss and Liebeskind have reported no relevant financial relationships.
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.