Citations 2
Uniform data set language measures for bvFTD and PPA diagnosis and monitoring
Staffaroni, Adam M. , Weıntraub, Sandra , Rascovsky, Katya, Rankin, Katherine P. , Taylor, Jack C. , Fields, Julie A. , Casaletto, Kaitlin B. , Gorno‐Tempini, Maria Luisa , Heuer, Hilary W. , Teylan, Merilee, Kukull, Walter A. , Miller, Bruce L. , Rosen, Howard J. , Boxer, Adam L. , Kramer, Joel H. , Miller, Bruce L , Hillis, Argye Elizabeth , Lukic, Sladjana , Boeve, Bradley F.
Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring | February 20, 2021 | Volume: 13 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available
Abstract Introduction The Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration Module (FTLD‐MOD) includes a neuropsychological battery designed to assess the clinical features of FTLD, although much is unknown about its utility. We investigated FTLD‐MOD and Uniform Data Set 3.0 (UDS) language tests for differential diagnosis and disease monitoring. Methods Linear regressions compared baseline performances in 1655 National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center participants (behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD, n = 612), semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA, n = 185), non‐fluent/agrammatic variant PPA (nfvPPA, n = 168), logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA, n = 109), and controls (n = 581)). Sample sizes to detect treatment effects were estimated using longitudinal data. Results Among PPAs, the FTLD‐MOD language tasks and UDS Multilingual Naming Test accurately discriminated svPPA. Number Span Forward best discriminated lvPPA; Phonemic:Semantic Fluency ratio was excellent for nfvPPA classification. UDS fluency and naming measures required the smallest sample size to detect meaningful change. Discussion The FTLD‐MOD and UDS differentiated among PPA subtypes. UDS 3.0 measures performed best for longitudinal monitoring.
Version 3 of the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center’s Uniform Data Set
Besser, Lilah M. , Kukull, Walter A. , Chui, Helena C., Galasko, Douglas, Weıntraub, Sandra , Jicha, Gregory A. , Carlsson, Cynthia M., Burns, Jeffrey M. , Rascovsky, Katya, Teylan, Merilee, Beekly, Duane, Bollenbeck, Mark, Monsell, Sarah E. , Zhou, Xiao‐Hua , Thomas, Nicole M. , Robichaud, Elizabeth, Dean, Margaret, Hubbard, Janene L., Jacka, Mary, Schwabe‐Fry, Kristen, Wu, Joylee, Phelps, Creighton H., Morris, John C. , Carlsson, Cynthia M. , Morris, John C , Knopman, David S. , Chui, Helena C. , Quinn, Joseph F. , Sweet, Robert A. , Thomas, George E. C. , Mock, Charles , Jicha, Gregory A
Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders | October 30, 2018 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 351-358
Introduction: In 2015, the US Alzheimer’s Disease Centers (ADC) implemented Version 3 of the Uniform Data Set (UDS). This paper describes the history of Version 3 development and the UDS data that are freely available to researchers. Methods: UDS Version 3 was developed after years of coordination between the National Institute on Aging-appointed Clinical Task Force (CTF), clinicians from ∼30 ADCs, and the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC). The CTF recognized the need for updates to align with the state of the science in dementia research, while being flexible to the diverse needs and diseases studied at the ADCs. Version 3 also developed a nonproprietary neuropsychological battery. Results: This paper focuses on the substantial Version 3 changes to the UDS forms related to clinical diagnosis and characterization of clinical symptoms to match updated consensus-based diagnostic criteria. Between March 2015 and March 2018, 4820 participants were enrolled using UDS Version 3. Longitudinal data were available for 25,337 of the 37,568 total participants using all UDS versions. Discussion: The results from utilization of the UDS highlight the possibility for numerous research institutions to successfully collaborate, produce, and use standardized data collection instruments for over a decade.