Background: The emergency personnel who responded to the World Trade Center (WTC) attacks endured severe occupational exposures, yet the prevalence of cognitive impairment remains unknown among WTC-exposed-FDNY-responders. The present study screened for mild and severe cognitive impairment in WTC-exposed FDNY responders using objective tests, compared prevalence rates to a cohort of non-FDNY WTC-exposed responders, and descriptively to meta-analytic estimates of MCI from global, community, and clinical populations. Methods: A sample of WTC-exposed-FDNY responders (n = 343) was recruited to complete an extensive battery of cognitive, psychological, and physical tests. The prevalences of domain-specific impairments were estimated based on the results of norm-referenced tests, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Jak/Bondi criteria, Petersen criteria, and the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer′s Association (NIA-AA) criteria were used to diagnose MCI. NIA-AA criteria were also used to diagnose severe cognitive impairment. Generalized linear models were used to compare prevalence estimates of cognitive impairment to a large sample of WTC-exposed-non-FDNY responders from the General Responder Cohort (GRC; n = 7102) who completed the MoCA during a similar time frame. Result: Among FDNY responders under 65 years, the unadjusted prevalence of MCI varied from 52.57% to 71.37% depending on the operational definition of MCI, apart from using a conservative cut-off applied to MoCA total scores (18 < MoCA < 23), which yielded a markedly lower crude prevalence (24.31%) compared to alternative criteria. The prevalence of MCI was higher among WTC-exposed-FDNY-responders, compared to WTC-exposed-non-FDNY-GRC-responders (adjusted RR = 1.53, 95% C.I. = [1.24, 1.88], p < .001) and meta-analytic estimates from different global, community, and clinical populations. Following NIA-AA diagnostic guidelines, 4.96% of WTC-exposed-FDNY-responders met the criteria for severe impairments (95% CI = [2.91% to 7.82%]), a prevalence that remained largely unchanged after excluding responders over the age of 65 years. Discussion: There is a high prevalence of mild and severe cognitive impairment among WTC-responders highlighting the putative role of occupational/environmental and disaster-related exposures in the etiology of accelerated cognitive decline.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Data collection was funded by U01OH012258 awarded to S.A.P.C and C.B.H., R01AG049953 awarded to S.A.P.C., CDC 2011-200-39361 awarded to B.J.L., and by the SUNY Research Foundation. The first author was also awarded and partially funded by R21AG074705-01.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

All protocols were approved by the Institutional Review Board at Stony Brook University (CORIHS IRB#2021-00295), and participants provided informed oral and written consent.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Data are not publicly available. Requests for deidentified data will be considered and will require approval from principal investigators and the IRB at the first author′s home institution.