Cited by 581Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research

Focal cortical presentations of Alzheimer's disease

Alladi, S., Xuereb, J., Bak, T., Nestor, P., Knibb, J., Patterson, K., Hodges, J. R.·2007·Brain

Abstract

To determine the frequency of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology in patients presenting with progressive focal cortical syndromes, notably posterior cortical atrophy (PCA), corticobasal syndrome (CBS), behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) (or a mixed aphasia) and semantic dementia (SD); and to compare the age of onset, evolution and prognosis in patients with focal cortical presentations of AD versus more typical AD and those with non AD pathology. From a total of 200 patients with comprehensive prospective clinical and pathological data we selected 120 : 100 consecutive cases with focal cortical syndromes and 20 with clinically typical AD. Clinical files were reviewed blind to pathological diagnosis. Of the 100 patients with focal syndromes, 34 had AD as the primary pathological diagnosis with the following distribution across clinical subtypes: all 7 of the PCA (100%); 6 of 12 with CBS (50%); 2 of 28 with bvFTD (7.1%); 12 of 26 with PNFA (44.1%); 5 of 7 with mixed aphasia (71.4%) and 2 of 20 with SD (10%). Of 20 with clinically typical AD, 19 had pathological AD. Age at both onset and death was greater in the atypical AD cases than those with non-AD pathology, although survival was equivalent. AD is a much commoner cause of focal cortical syndromes than previously recognised, particularly in PCA, PNFA and CBS, but rarely causes SD or bvFTD. The focal syndrome may remain pure for many years. Patients with atypical AD tend…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/awm213

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alladi, S., Xuereb, J., Bak, T., Nestor, P., Knibb, J., Patterson, K., & Hodges, J. R.
Affiliations
MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
Corresponding author
Alladi, S.
Venue
Brain
Published
2007-10-01
Volume
130
Issue
10
Pages
2636-2645
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2142244150
Cited by
581
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 50
FWCI
15.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, posterior cortical atrophy, corticobasal syndrome, behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, progressive nonfluent aphasia, semantic dementia, mixed aphasia, age of onset, prognosis, survival, neuropathology
MeSH terms
Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Atrophy, Cerebral Cortex, Cognition Disorders, Dementia, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Syndrome, Survival Analysis, Age of Onset, Disease Progression, Aphasia, Primary Progressive

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review