Pelak, Victoria S.

Behavioral neurology & neuropsychiatry (BNNP) is a field that seeks to understand brain–behavior relationships, including fundamental brain organization principles and the many ways that brain structures and connectivity can be disrupted, leading to abnormalities of behavior, cognition, emotion, perception, and social cognition. In North America, BNNP has existed as an integrated subspecialty through the United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties since 2006. Nonetheless, the number of behavioral neurologists across academic medical centers and community settings is not keeping pace with increasing clinical and research demand. In this commentary, we provide a brief history of BNNP followed by an outline of the current challenges and opportunities for BNNP from the behavioral neurologist’s perspective across clinical, research, and educational spheres. We provide a practical guide for promoting BNNP and addressing the shortage of behavioral neurologists to facilitate the continued growth and development of the subspecialty. We also urge a greater commitment to recruit trainees from diverse backgrounds so as to dismantle persistent obstacles that hinder inclusivity in BNNP—efforts that will further enhance the growth and impact of the subspecialty. With rapidly expanding diagnostic and therapeutic approaches across a range of conditions at the intersection of neurology and psychiatry, BNNP is well positioned to attract new trainees and expand its reach across clinical, research, and educational activities.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONDelay in diagnosis of posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) syndrome is common, and the lack of familiarity with assessment tools for identifying visual cortical dysfunction is a contributing factor. We propose recommendations for the approach to the evaluation of PCA clinical features during the office visit, the neuropsychological evaluation, and the research setting. A recommended screening battery for eye clinics is also proposed.METHODSRecommendations were developed using results from a web‐based survey of members of Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Atypical Alzheimer's Disease Professional Interest Area (PIA), literature review, and consensus by the PCA assessment working party of the Atypical Alzheimer's Disease PIA.RESULTSSurvey results revealed robust agreement for assessment tool preferences for PCA features, and many respondents indicated that they reserve assessment tools for use only when PCA is suspected. For some PCA features, curated tools were preferred over validated battery tools, particularly for the office visit. Consensus recommendations superseded survey preferences for two core cognitive features within the 2017 PCA diagnostic criteria.DISCUSSIONThese consensus recommendations provide an evaluation framework for PCA clinical features and can facilitate timely and accurate recognition and diagnosis of PCA. Broader use of these tools should be sought, and development and validation of novel PCA clinical outcome assessments are needed to improve our understanding of atypical AD and other dementias and support the inclusion of those with PCA in treatment trials.

Abstract Introduction A classification framework for posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) is proposed to improve the uniformity of definition of the syndrome in a variety of research settings. Methods Consensus statements about PCA were developed through a detailed literature review, the formation of an international multidisciplinary working party which convened on four occasions, and a Web‐based quantitative survey regarding symptom frequency and the conceptualization of PCA. Results A three‐level classification framework for PCA is described comprising both syndrome‐ and disease‐level descriptions. Classification level 1 (PCA) defines the core clinical, cognitive, and neuroimaging features and exclusion criteria of the clinico‐radiological syndrome. Classification level 2 (PCA‐pure, PCA‐plus) establishes whether, in addition to the core PCA syndrome, the core features of any other neurodegenerative syndromes are present. Classification level 3 (PCA attributable to AD [PCA‐AD], Lewy body disease [PCA‐LBD], corticobasal degeneration [PCA‐CBD], prion disease [PCA‐prion]) provides a more formal determination of the underlying cause of the PCA syndrome, based on available pathophysiological biomarker evidence. The issue of additional syndrome‐level descriptors is discussed in relation to the challenges of defining stages of syndrome severity and characterizing phenotypic heterogeneity within the PCA spectrum. Discussion There was strong agreement regarding the definition of the core clinico‐radiological syndrome, meaning that the current consensus statement should be regarded as a refinement, development, and extension of previous single‐center PCA criteria rather than any wholesale alteration or redescription of the syndrome. The framework and terminology may facilitate the interpretation of research data across studies, be applicable across a broad range of research scenarios (e.g., behavioral interventions, pharmacological trials), and provide a foundation for future collaborative work.