Cited by 77Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research

Longitudinal decline in autopsy-defined frontotemporal lobar degeneration

Open access
Grossman, M., Xie, S. X., Libon, D. J., Wang, X., Massimo, L., Moore, P., Vesely, L., Berkowitz, R. +6 more·2008·Neurology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The natural history of patients with pathologically proven frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is important from clinical and biologic perspectives, but is not well documented quantitatively. METHODS: We examine longitudinal decline in cognitive functioning in an autopsy-proven cohort of patients with the clinical diagnosis of a FTLD spectrum disorder or FTLD pathology using a panel of neuropsychological measures. Patients are categorized according to findings at autopsy into tau-positive FTLD, tau-negative FTLD, and frontal variant-Alzheimer disease (fvAD) subgroups. RESULTS: Patients decline significantly over time on all neuropsychological measures. Moreover, several measures differentiate between histopathologically distinct subgroups throughout the course of the disease process. This includes a significant double dissociation involving relative difficulty on a visual constructional measure in tau-positive patients compared to relatively impaired visual confrontation naming in tau-negative patients. Longitudinal measures of FAS naming fluency and animal naming fluency also distinguish tau-positive patients and tau-negative patients with FTLD from patients with fvAD. Other measures show significant decline but do not distinguish between histopathologic groups longitudinally. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest different longitudinal patterns of cognitive decline in pathologically defined subgroups of patients. Measures consistently distinguishing between patient subgroups can be used to bolster diagnostic accuracy throughout the course of these diseases, while measures demonstrating undifferentiated longitudinal decline may serve as useful endpoints in treatment trials.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/01.wnl.0000303816.25065.bc

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 43 · Cited by 77

Authors
Grossman, M., Xie, S. X., Libon, D. J., Wang, X., Massimo, L., Moore, P., Vesely, L., Berkowitz, R., Chatterjee, A., Coslett, H. B., Hurtig, H. I., Forman, M. S., Lee, V. M.-Y., & Trojanowski, J. Q.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
Neurology
Published
2008-05-27
Volume
70
Issue
22
Pages
2036-2045
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2123083259
Cited by
77
References
43
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 7
FWCI
5.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (AG15116, P30AG010124, R01AG015116, P01AG017586, AG17586, AG-10124, AG 44266)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P50NS053488, R01NS044266)
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
frontotemporal lobar degeneration, natural history (disease), cognitive decline, neuropsychological measures, double dissociation, confrontation naming, treatment endpoints
MeSH terms
Aged, Autopsy, Dementia, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Cohort Studies, Disease Progression

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