Dickerson, Bradford Clark

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or a related dementia (ADRD) are two decades old. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. An expert workgroup conducted a review of 7374 publications (133 met inclusion criteria) and developed recommendations as steps in an evaluation process. This summary briefly reviews core recommendations and details specialist recommendations of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes primary care recommendations. If clinicians use the recommendations in this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings. Highlights US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. This summary focuses on recommendations appropriate for specialty practice settings, forming key elements of a high‐quality, evidence‐supported evaluation process aimed at characterizing, diagnosing, and disclosing the patient's cognitive functional status, cognitive–behavioral syndrome, and likely underlying brain disease so that optimal care plans to maximize patient/care partner dyad quality of life can be developed; a companion article summarizes primary care recommendations. If clinicians use this guideline and health‐care systems provide adequate resources, outcomes should improve in most patients in most practice settings.

Abstract US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's Disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. This evidence‐based guideline was developed to empower all—including primary care—clinicians to implement a structured approach for evaluating a patient with symptoms that may represent clinical AD/ADRD. As part of the modified Delphi approach and guideline development process (7374 publications were reviewed; 133 met inclusion criteria) an expert workgroup developed recommendations as steps in a patient‐centered evaluation process. The workgroup provided a summary of validated instruments to measure symptoms in daily life (including cognition, mood and behavior, and daily function) and to test for signs of cognitive impairment in the office. This article distills this information to provide a resource to support clinicians in the implementation of this approach in clinical practice. The companion articles provide context for primary care and specialty clinicians with regard to how to fit these instruments into the workflow and actions to take when integration of performance on these instruments with clinical profile and clinician judgment support potential cognitive impairment.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Psychotropic medication (PM) use in behavioral‐variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is higher than in other dementias. However, no information exists on whether PM use differs between sporadic and genetic bvFTD. METHODS We analyzed data from sporadic and genetic bvFTD participants with PM prescriptions in the Advancing Research and Treatment in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration/Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Frontotemporal Dementia Subjects study. We estimated ordinal odds ratio (OOR) of having more PM comparing sporadic and genetic bvFTD. Finally, we explored the neuropsychiatric symptom (NPS) combinations using classification and regression trees (CART). RESULTS We included 263 with sporadic and 193 with genetic bvFTD. The OOR for sporadic bvFTD to be on PM was 1.75 (95% confidence interval: 1.21 to 2.53) for the fully adjusted model. CART revealed the most common NPS combination was apathy + personality changes in 18% of participants. DISCUSSION Participants with sporadic bvFTD were twice as likely to be on PM compared to genetic bvFTD. The reason for increased PM usage in sporadic bvFTD participants should be further investigated. Highlights We report on patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). We evaluated the psychotropic medication (PM) prescription at baseline in the cohort. Patients with sporadic bvFTD had more prescriptions for PM than genetic patients. The frequency of symptoms combination was different in sporadic and genetic bvFTD.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) manifests prior to the age of 65, and affects 4%–8% of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). The current analyses sought to examine longitudinal cognitive trajectories of participants with early‐onset dementia. METHODS Data from 307 cognitively normal (CN) volunteer participants and those with amyloid‐positive EOAD or amyloid‐negative cognitive impairment (EOnonAD) were compared. Cognitive trajectories across a comprehensive cognitive battery spanning 42 months were examined using mixed‐effects modeling. RESULTS The EOAD group displayed worse cognition at baseline relative to EOnonAD and CN groups, and more aggressive declines in cognition over time. The largest effects were observed on measures of executive functioning domains, while memory declines were blunted in EOAD. DISCUSSION EOAD declined 2–4× faster than EOnonAD, and EOAD pathology is not restricted to memory networks. Early identification of deficits is critical to ensure that individuals with sporadic EOAD can be considered for treatment using disease‐modifying medications. Highlights Represents the most comprehensive longitudinal characterization of sporadic EOAD to date. The trajectory of cognitive declines was steep for EOAD participants and worse than for other groups. Executive functioning measures exhibited the greatest declines over time in EOAD.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) and late‐onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) share similar amyloid etiology, but evidence from smaller‐scale studies suggests that they manifest differently clinically. Current analyses sought to contrast the cognitive profiles of EOAD and LOAD. METHODS Z‐ score cognitive‐domain composites for 311 amyloid‐positive sporadic EOAD and 314 amyloid‐positive LOAD participants were calculated from baseline data from age‐appropriate control cohorts. Z‐ score composites were compared between AD groups for each domain. RESULTS After controlling for cognitive status, EOAD displayed worse visuospatial, executive functioning, and processing speed/attention skills relative to LOAD, and LOAD displayed worse language, episodic immediate memory, and episodic delayed memory. DISCUSSION Sporadic EOAD possesses distinct cognitive profiles relative to LOAD. Clinicians should be alert for non‐amnestic impairments in younger patients to ensure proper identification and intervention using disease‐modifying treatments. Highlights Both early‐onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) and late‐onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) participants displayed widespread cognitive impairments relative to their same‐aged peers. Cognitive impairments were more severe for EOAD than for LOAD participants in visuospatial and executive domains. Memory and language impairments were more severe for LOAD than for EOAD participants Results were comparable after removing clinical phenotypes of posterior cortical atrophy (PCA), primary progressive aphasia (lv‐PPA), and frontal‐variant AD.

Abstract The pathophysiological mechanisms driving disease progression of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and corresponding biomarkers are not fully understood. We leveraged aptamer-based proteomics (> 4,000 proteins) to identify dysregulated communities of co-expressed cerebrospinal fluid proteins in 116 adults carrying autosomal dominant FTLD mutations (C9orf72, GRN, MAPT) compared to 39 noncarrier controls. Network analysis identified 31 protein co-expression modules. Proteomic signatures of genetic FTLD clinical severity included increased abundance of RNA splicing (particularly in C9orf72 and GRN) and extracellular matrix (particularly in MAPT) modules, as well as decreased abundance of synaptic/neuronal and autophagy modules. The generalizability of genetic FTLD proteomic signatures was tested and confirmed in independent cohorts of 1) sporadic progressive supranuclear palsy-Richardson syndrome and 2) frontotemporal dementia spectrum syndromes. Network-based proteomics hold promise for identifying replicable molecular pathways in adults living with FTLD. ‘Hub’ proteins driving co-expression of affected modules warrant further attention as candidate biomarkers and therapeutic targets.