Cited by 37Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research

Longitudinal memory profiles in behavioral-variant frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer’s disease

Schubert, Samantha, Leyton, Cristian E., Hodges, John R., Piguet, Olivier·2016·Journal of Alzheimer's Disease

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease (AD) and behavioral-variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) can present with an overlapping neuropsychological profile, which often hinders their clinical differentiation. OBJECTIVE: To compare changes over time in memory, general cognition tasks, and functional scales between bvFTD and AD. METHODS: Consecutive cases diagnosed with probable bvFTD (n = 22) and typical AD (n = 31) with at least two clinical visits were selected. Of these, 13 (9 AD, 4 bvFTD) underwent Pittsburgh compound B PET scan, which supported the clinical diagnosis in all cases. Mixed-model regressions were used to estimate the differential rate of decline on selected tasks between cohorts. RESULTS: Analyses demonstrated that, despite equivalent baseline performance, bvFTD patients experienced a more rapid functional deterioration and a steeper decline in global cognition than AD patients. At baseline, both groups were impaired on executive function and memory tasks compared to controls, but these deficits were more marked in the bvFTD group. In addition, performance on these domains continued to decline more rapidly in this group. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the initial neuropsychological assessment nor projected performances can reliably distinguish the totality of bvFTD and AD individuals. Nevertheless, annual rates of progression on cognitive tasks provide valuable information and will potentially help establish the impact of future therapeutic treatments in these dementia syndromes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/jad-150802

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 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
Schubert, S., Leyton, C. E., Hodges, J. R., & Piguet, O.
Affiliations
  • Neuroscience Research Australia (AU)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Piguet, Olivier
Venue
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
Published
2016-03-30
Volume
51
Issue
3
Pages
775-782
ISSN
  • 1387-2877 (ISSN-L)
  • 1875-8908
OpenAlex
W2281205902
Cited by
37
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4
FWCI
5.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Alzheimer s Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of New South Wales
  • Australian Research Council
  • National Health and 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
behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, Alzheimer's disease
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Aniline Compounds, Brain, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Memory, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Thiazoles, Disease Progression, Radiopharmaceuticals, Positron-Emission Tomography, Executive Function, Frontotemporal Dementia

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