Tipton, Philip W.

Objective To determine the clinical features that identify patients with suspected rapidly progressive dementia (RPD) who will develop RPD. Methods Patients with suspected RPD were enrolled and followed at Mayo Clinic (Jacksonville, FL; January 2020 to October 2023) and Washington University (Saint Louis, MO; June 2016 to December 2019). Two dementia specialists independently reviewed clinical data and assigned diagnoses. Patients were diagnosed with RPD if they developed dementia within 1 year or incapacitation within 2 years of symptom onset. The associations between clinical features and causes and outcomes were explored via univariate and multivariate comparisons. Results Of 248 patients with suspected RPD, 185 (74.6%) met criteria for RPD. Patients with RPD were older (62.6 ± 14.5 vs 55.2 ± 18.1 years; p < 0.001), and more frequently diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease or related dementias (OR 3.13, 95% CI 1.40, 7.31) or Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (OR 4.67, 95% CI 1.38, 15.75). Visual agnosia (15/183; 8.2%), substantial brain atrophy (27/182; 14.8%), and periodic epileptiform discharges (11/151; 7.3%) were exclusively detected in patients with RPD. After controlling for age, intensive care unit admission (OR 4.77, 95% CI 1.61, 14.12), lack of seizures (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.15, 5.31), abnormal brain magnetic resonance imaging (OR 2.01, 95% CI 0.997, 4.05), and cerebrospinal fluid white blood cell count ≤5 cells/mm 3 (OR 3.30, 95% CI 1.60, 6.82) were also independently associated with RPD. Patients with RPD were more likely to die or develop severe dementia (mean time to outcome, 36.1 months; 95% CI 31.2–41.0). Interpretation Selected clinical features may identify patients with suspected RPD who are likely to continue to decline. Early recognition of these features may improve diagnostic accuracy and inform prognosis. ANN NEUROL 2025;98:764–776

AbstractBackgroundSAAs represent a promising biomarker of Lewy Body disease (LBD), with high sensitivity (87.3%, 95%CI: 0.755‐0.947) and specificity (97.2%, 95%CI: 0.922‐0.994) for detection of patients in the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative repository with positive DaT SPECT; and reasonable sensitivity (78.7%, 95%CI: 0.66‐0.88) and specificity (89.5%, 95%CI: 0.78‐0.96 referencing clinical diagnoses in participants included within national research repositories. However, test performance in heterogeneous clinical cohorts is unknown.MethodPatients with typical (n=122) and rapid progressive dementia (n=76) consented to banking of CSF at the time of clinically‐indicated diagnostic lumbar puncture. Clinical data were deidentified and uploaded to a secure research database and clinical (etiologic) diagnoses established by two neurologists following independent review of available records. SAA (SYNTap™) were run on stored CSF by Amprion Diagnostics (San Diego, CA).ResultMedian participant age was 69.1 years (18.4‐86.1); 56.3% were female. CSF was sampled median 1.4 years (0‐10.3) after symptom onset. Pathological alpha‐synuclein was detected in 28/122 patients with typically progressive dementia (including 6/18 patients with presumed LBD; sensitivity 33%, specificity 79%) and 11/76 patients with rapid progressive dementia (including 3/9 patients with presumed LBD; sensitivity 33%, specificity 88%). “Positive” SAA was associated with tremor (OR=3.2, 95%CI: 1.3‐7.8), visual hallucinations (OR=6.14, 95%CI 1.6‐23.6), and REM behavior disorder (OR=3.7, 95%CI: 1.4‐9.5) in patients with typical but not rapid progressive dementia. Brain autopsies were completed in 17 patients: Lewy bodies were detected in 2/3 patients with positive SAA and no patients with negative SAA.Conclusion“Positive” SAA demonstrated reasonable specificity but low sensitivity for the diagnosis of LBD. Additional studies in heterogeneous cohorts with neuropathologic data are needed to optimize clinical applications of SAA.

AbstractBackgroundPatients with rapid progressive Alzheimer disease and related dementias (rpAD/ADRD) develop dementia within 1 year or incapacitation within 2 years of symptom onset. We previously showed that selected CSF biomarkers of neuronal injury (NfL, VILIP‐1), AD neuropathology (p‐tau181), and neuroinflammation (GFAP, MCP‐1, sTREM2) measured at presentation associated with etiologic diagnoses and reliably differentiated patients with treatment‐responsive causes of rapid progressive dementia. However, no differences were identified between CSF biomarkers in patients with rapid and typical progressive forms of AD/ADRD, leaving key questions unanswered concerning the mechanisms that drive rpAD/ADRD. Blood‐based biomarkers may inform the systemic factors that contribute to rpAD/ADRD, including the systemic inflammation, metabolic function, and vascular injury.MethodsBiomarkers of systemic inflammation (Eotaxin‐3, IFN‐γ, IL‐1b, IL‐2, IL‐4, IL‐6, IL‐8, IL‐10, IL‐12p70, IL‐13, TARC, TNF‐α), metabolic function (A2M, B2M, FABP‐3, FVII, I‐309, IL‐18, PPY, TNC, TPO), and vascular injury (CRP, SAA, sICAM‐1, sVCAM‐1) were measured in plasma obtained at presentation from patients with rpAD/ADRD (n=29) and age‐ and sex‐ similar participants with typical progressive AD/ADRD (n=39) enrolled in prospective studies of memory and aging at Mayo Clinic in Florida. Biomarker measures were completed at the University of North Texas Institute for Translational Research using Meso Scale Discovery multiplexed assays. Biomarker concentrations were compared between groups using univariate analyses; potential predictors (p<0.05) were further evaluated via step‐wise multivariate logistic regression.ResultsMarkers of vascular injury (SAA, CRP, sICAM‐1), metabolic function (I‐309, TPO), and systemic inflammation (Eotaxin‐3, TARC, TNF‐α) were increased in patients with rapid versus typical progressive AD/ADRD (p<0.05). Eotaxin‐3, I‐309, and SAA were independently associated with rpAD/ADRD in multivariable model after controlling for age and sex. The overall model correctly characterized 86.8% of patients, with an area under the curve of 0.864 (95%CI: 0.777‐0.950; p<0.001).ConclusionBlood‐based biomarkers of systemic inflammation, metabolic function, and vascular injury were elevated at presentation in patients with rapid vs typical AD/ADRD. These findings may provide additional insights into the mechanisms that drive rpAD/ADRD. Longitudinal measures from larger cohorts are needed to decipher the relationship between candidate biomarkers and rpAD/ADRD.