Fischer, D. Luke

Abstract INTRODUCTION Similarities between frontotemporal lobar degeneration with transactive response DNA‐binding protein of 43 kDa (TDP‐43) (FTLD‐TDP) and limbic‐predominant age‐related TDP‐43 encephalopathy neuropathologic change (LATE‐NC) raise questions about whether they represent distinct entities or a single disease spectrum. The literature mostly examined series with disproportionate numbers of LATE‐NC over FTLD‐TDP. METHODS Leveraging a clinicopathological collection of FTLD‐TDP ( N = 148) from the University of California, San Francisco, we compared demographic, clinical, genetic, and neuropathological features of FTLD‐TDP, particularly FTLD‐TDP type A ( N = 39), and LATE‐NC ( N = 42). RESULTS FTLD‐TDP type A cases were younger at onset and death, had shorter disease duration, and frequent genetic causes ( GRN , C9ORF72 ) compared to LATE‐NC, which were mostly sporadic and older. Blinded evaluation of middle frontal gyrus (MFG) TDP‐43 immunostaining alone proved insufficient to reliably differentiate FTLD‐TDP type A from LATE‐NC stage 3. However, factoring in all neuropathologic features, FTLD type A and LATE‐NC could be differentiated with >95% confidence. DISCUSSION These overall findings support distinct diagnostic entities for FTLD‐TDP and LATE‐NC.

Abstract Our understanding of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADRD) has grown exponentially, thanks to significant investments by the National Institute on Aging (NIA). This article celebrates the 40th anniversary of the NIA's Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers, highlighting the pivotal role of neuropathology as the bedrock for neurodegeneration research. Neuropathology has championed the key principles of proteinopathy, selective vulnerability, and stereotypic spread. Furthermore, neuropathologic studies advanced our understanding of ADRD prevalence, heterogeneity, clinical–pathological correlations, and genetic underpinnings, spurring biomarker development for target engagement and disease monitoring. Disease‐modifying therapies for AD were inspired and informed by neuropathology. The neuropathology community is poised to refine diagnostics, leveraging digital pathology and integrating genetics and pathomics to enhance subtyping for novel precision medicine approaches. Despite some common misconceptions and logistical challenges, neuropathology continues to be a critical component of the ADRD research infrastructure, serving as a key bridge between allied basic and clinical sciences. Highlights We celebrate 40 years of NIA‐funded ADRCs and their contributions through neuropathology studies that have significantly advanced our understanding and treatment of ADRD. Neuropathology uncovers principles of neurodegenerative disease: proteinopathy, selective vulnerability, and stereotypic spread, informing diagnostics and therapies. Development of AD biomarkers with reference to neuropathology enhances accuracy in diagnosis and monitoring, paving the way for targeted disease‐modifying therapies. Integration of digital pathology, genetics, and novel tools in neurodegeneration research promises advanced precision medicine approaches and refined diagnostics. Misconceptions and logistical challenges to neuropathological research are addressed to improve understanding and collaboration.