Citations

AbstractBackgroundMemory impairment is generally considered minimal to absent in those with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). We sought to assess the frequencies of subjective and objective memory impairment in individuals with mild bvFTD according to consensus criteria.MethodAssessments were performed in mildly symptomatic bvFTD [defined by global FTLD Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR®+NACC FTLD) = 1] mutation carriers (Familial) and non‐mutation carriers (Sporadic) who are participants in the ARTFL LEFFTDS Longitudinal Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ALLFTD, www.allftd.org) study. Mutation carriers had a pathogenic mutation in the MAPT, GRN or C9orf72 gene. The presence of subjective memory impairment was defined by a rating >0 on the memory domain of the CDR®+NACC FTLD. Evidence of objective memory impairment was based on performance across 7 memory measures, which include the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set Version 3 – Craft Story Immediate Recall (CSImm) and Delayed Recall (CSDel), Benson Figure Delayed Recall (BenDel), and the California Verbal Learning Test – Learning (CVLearn), Immediate Recall (CVImm), Delayed Recall (CVDel), and Recognition (CVRecog). Performance was considered abnormal for z‐scores ≤ ‐1.5.ResultData from 38 Familial (mean age 60±8 years, 61% male), and 109 Sporadic (mean age 63±7 years, 70% male) participants were analyzed. Memory ratings >0 on the CDR®+NACC FTLD were common for both Familial (84%) and Sporadic (88%). The frequencies of abnormal performance in the Familial vs Sporadic groups, respectively, per memory measure were: CSImm 43.8% vs 45.9%, p = 0.83; CSDel 46.9% vs 52.6%, p = 0.58; BenDel 29.4% vs 46.4%, p = 0.08; CVLearn 54.8% vs 39.8, p = 0.14; CVImm 64.5% vs 50%, p = 0.16, CVDel 80.6% vs 55.1%, p = 0.01, and CVRecog 51.6 vs 49%, p = 0.80. The frequencies of abnormal performance did not differ (all p>0.05) between Familial and Sporadic for ≥2 tests (79.3% vs 67.7%), ≥4 tests (55.2% vs 44.1%) and ≥6 tests (34.5% vs 31.2%).ConclusionThese data suggest that among those with a mild global severity of bvFTD features: 1) subjective and objective memory impairment are relatively frequent, and 2) the frequency of impairment across memory measures is largely similar between familial and sporadic bvFTD. The presence of memory impairment should not preclude a diagnosis of bvFTD.

AbstractBackgroundStructural variants range from simple loss or gain of genetic material to complex events that restructure entire chromosomes. This heterogeneity coupled with variant size greater than sequencing read‐length makes structural variant mapping from short‐read sequencing data difficult and error‐prone. Consequently, the role of structural variants is poorly explored in many phenotypes, including dementia.MethodWe used the GATK‐SV pipeline that combines four external structural variant mapping algorithms with machine‐learning to build high‐quality consensus structural variant calls. We applied GATK‐SV to short‐read whole‐genome sequencing data of 2,601 frontotemporal dementia‐amyotrophic lateral sclerosis spectrum (FTD/ALS) patients, 2,612 Lewy body dementia (LBD) patients, and 4,132 neurologically unaffected participants.ResultAfter stringent quality‐control, we performed genome‐wide association studies on 2,307 ALS/FTD patients versus 3,677 controls with 4,699 common structural variants and 2,355 LBD patients versus 3,700 controls with 4,889 common structural variants. In the FTD/ALS cohort, we identified well‐known risk variants at the C9orf72 (p‐value = 4.99×10‐18, OR = 14.47, 95% CI = 7.90–26.49) and MAPT loci (p‐value = 3.48×10‐6, OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.68–0.86) corroborating the ability of our pipeline to identify disease‐associated structural variants. Moreover, we discovered, replicated, and validated TPCN1 as a novel risk locus for LBD (p‐value = 9.18×10‐6, OR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.22–1.67). Further, we identified rare exonic variants with known pathogenic or likely pathogenic effects, such as an SNCA gene duplication in LBD and a deletion of exons 1 and 2 in CHCHD10 in FTD/ALS. We additionally observed structural variants in regulatory regions, e.g. a deletion of a key PSEN2 enhancer, which resulted in an approximate 0.70 fold‐change in PSEN2 expression in LBD. Finally, we built an interactive web app where structural variants can be visualized and explored (https://ndru-ndrs-lng-nih.shinyapps.io/non_ad_dementias_sv_app/).ConclusionCommon and rare structural variants play a role in LBD and FTD/ALS. Our structural variant resource is publicly available and can be used to further explore the role of structural variants in LBD and FTD/ALS.

Introduction: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is associated with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), independent of shared risk factors. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence, clinical, and echocardiographic (TTE) features of HFpEF in patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD. Methods: We performed a retrospective single-center cohort study of patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD in the Duke NAFLD Biorepository and Clinical Database. Study entry was at the time of liver biopsy and patients were followed until death or 5/1/2023. Clinical and echocardiographic data were abstracted via manual chart review. HFpEF was defined as: at least one TTE characteristic (left atrial volume index ≥ 29 ml/m 2 , septal wall thickness ≥ 1 cm, or evidence of diastolic dysfunction) and signs or symptoms of heart failure (diagnosis of heart failure on problem list, hospitalization for heart failure, elevated NT pro-BNP level, jugular venous distention, use of loop diuretics, pulmonary or peripheral edema, fatigue, or exertional symptoms). Descriptive statistics were evaluated. Results: A total of 742 patients were included in the study. The mean age of the cohort was 50 +/- 12 years, and 83% were White. 95 (13%) had TTE both prior to study entry and during follow up, while 279 patients (38%) had TTE only during follow up. A total of 185 patients met criteria for HFpEF during follow up. After removing patients with TTE evidence of HFpEF prior to study entry, there were 132 cases of incident HFpEF over a mean follow up of 9.1 years, representing 47% of those with TTE after liver biopsy, and 18% of the overall cohort. Considering only TTE criteria, 142 patients had incident HFpEF. During follow up, 12 patients were hospitalized for heart failure. Conclusions: HFpEF is common in patients with NAFLD and a small percentage of patients do not have a chart diagnosis despite meeting echocardiographic criteria, suggesting that HFpEF may be under-recognized. Screening for HFpEF and/or formal care pathways to address early heart failure will be important to prevent morbidity and mortality in this population.