Citations

Abstract We report a group of patients presenting with a progressive dementia syndrome characterized by predominant dysfunction in core executive functions, relatively young age of onset and positive biomarkers for Alzheimer’s pathophysiology. Atypical frontal, dysexecutive/behavioural variants and early-onset variants of Alzheimer’s disease have been previously reported, but no diagnostic criteria exist for a progressive dysexecutive syndrome. In this retrospective review, we report on 55 participants diagnosed with a clinically defined progressive dysexecutive syndrome with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers available. Sixty-two per cent of participants were female with a mean of 15.2 years of education. The mean age of reported symptom onset was 53.8 years while the mean age at diagnosis was 57.2 years. Participants and informants commonly referred to initial cognitive symptoms as ‘memory problems’ but upon further inquiry described problems with core executive functions of working memory, cognitive flexibility and cognitive inhibitory control. Multi-domain cognitive impairment was evident in neuropsychological testing with executive dysfunction most consistently affected. The frontal and parietal regions which overlap with working memory networks consistently demonstrated hypometabolism on positron emission tomography. Genetic testing for autosomal dominant genes was negative in all eight participants tested and at least one APOE ε4 allele was present in 14/26 participants tested. EEG was abnormal in 14/17 cases with 13 described as diffuse slowing. Furthermore, CSF or neuroimaging biomarkers were consistent with Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology, although CSF p-tau was normal in 24% of cases. Fifteen of the executive predominate participants enrolled in research neuroimaging protocols and were compared to amnestic (n = 110), visual (n = 18) and language (n = 7) predominate clinical phenotypes of Alzheimer’s disease. This revealed a consistent pattern of hypometabolism in parieto-frontal brain regions supporting executive functions with relative sparing of the medial temporal lobe (versus amnestic phenotype), occipital (versus visual phenotype) and left temporal (versus language phenotype). We propose that this progressive dysexecutive syndrome should be recognized as a distinct clinical phenotype disambiguated from behavioural presentations and not linked specifically to the frontal lobe or a particular anatomic substrate without further study. This clinical presentation can be due to Alzheimer’s disease but is likely not specific for any single aetiology. Diagnostic criteria are proposed to facilitate additional research into this understudied clinical presentation.

Purpose The primary aim was to examine the utility of the Western Aphasia Battery–Revised (WAB-R; Kertesz, 2007 ) for classifying variants of primary progressive aphasia (PPA). Traditional WAB-R metrics of Aphasia Quotient (AQ), subtest scores, WAB-R classification, and several novel metrics were examined. A secondary aim was to examine these same WAB-R metrics in individuals with primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS). Method A retrospective analysis of WAB-R records from 169 participants enrolled in a study of neurodegenerative speech and language disorders was conducted. PPA/PPAOS classification was determined by consensus review of speech, language, and cognitive profiles. Scores on each of the WAB-R subtests were obtained to derive AQ, WAB-R aphasia profile, and 3 ratios reflecting relative performance on subtests. Results Mean AQ was significantly higher in the PPAOS group compared to all PPA variants except primary fluent aphasia. AQ above the normal cutoff was observed for 20% of participants with PPA. Significant main effects of group were noted for each of the subtests. Follow-up comparisons most frequently discriminated PPAOS, primary agrammatic aphasia (PAA), and logopenic progressive aphasia. Primary fluent aphasia and semantic dementia (SD) subtest scores were less distinctive, with the exception of Naming for SD, which was significantly lower than for PAA and PPAOS. When the WAB-R AQ detected aphasia, a classification of anomic aphasia was most frequently observed; this pattern held true for each of the PPA variants. The mean Information Content:Naming ratio was highest for SD, and the mean Comprehension:Fluency ratio was highest for PAA. Conclusions In the current study, AQ underestimated the presence of PPA and WAB-R classification did not distinguish among PPA classification determined by consensus. Performance on individual subtests and relative performance across subtests demonstrated inconsistent alignment with PPA classification. We conclude the WAB-R in isolation is inadequate to detect or characterize PPA. We instead suggest utilizing the WAB-R as 1 component of a comprehensive language and motor speech assessment when PPA is suspected.