Tipton, Philip W.

ImportanceFrontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is relatively rare, behavioral and motor symptoms increase travel burden, and standard neuropsychological tests are not sensitive to early-stage disease. Remote smartphone-based cognitive assessments could mitigate these barriers to trial recruitment and success, but no such tools are validated for FTLD.ObjectiveTo evaluate the reliability and validity of smartphone-based cognitive measures for remote FTLD evaluations.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this cohort study conducted from January 10, 2019, to July 31, 2023, controls and participants with FTLD performed smartphone application (app)–based executive functioning tasks and an associative memory task 3 times over 2 weeks. Observational research participants were enrolled through 18 centers of a North American FTLD research consortium (ALLFTD) and were asked to complete the tests remotely using their own smartphones. Of 1163 eligible individuals (enrolled in parent studies), 360 were enrolled in the present study; 364 refused and 439 were excluded. Participants were divided into discovery (n = 258) and validation (n = 102) cohorts. Among 329 participants with data available on disease stage, 195 were asymptomatic or had preclinical FTLD (59.3%), 66 had prodromal FTLD (20.1%), and 68 had symptomatic FTLD (20.7%) with a range of clinical syndromes.ExposureParticipants completed standard in-clinic measures and remotely administered ALLFTD mobile app (app) smartphone tests.Main Outcomes and MeasuresInternal consistency, test-retest reliability, association of smartphone tests with criterion standard clinical measures, and diagnostic accuracy.ResultsIn the 360 participants (mean [SD] age, 54.0 [15.4] years; 209 [58.1%] women), smartphone tests showed moderate-to-excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.77-0.95). Validity was supported by association of smartphones tests with disease severity (r range, 0.38-0.59), criterion-standard neuropsychological tests (r range, 0.40-0.66), and brain volume (standardized β range, 0.34-0.50). Smartphone tests accurately differentiated individuals with dementia from controls (area under the curve [AUC], 0.93 [95% CI, 0.90-0.96]) and were more sensitive to early symptoms (AUC, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.76-0.88]) than the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (AUC, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.59-0.78]) (z of comparison, −2.49 [95% CI, −0.19 to −0.02]; P = .01). Reliability and validity findings were highly similar in the discovery and validation cohorts. Preclinical participants who carried pathogenic variants performed significantly worse than noncarrier family controls on 3 app tasks (eg, 2-back β = −0.49 [95% CI, −0.72 to −0.25]; P < .001) but not a composite of traditional neuropsychological measures (β = −0.14 [95% CI, −0.42 to 0.14]; P = .32).Conclusions and RelevanceThe findings of this cohort study suggest that smartphones could offer a feasible, reliable, valid, and scalable solution for remote evaluations of FTLD and may improve early detection. Smartphone assessments should be considered as a complementary approach to traditional in-person trial designs. Future research should validate these results in diverse populations and evaluate the utility of these tests for longitudinal monitoring.

AbstractBackgroundRapidly progressive dementia (RPD) includes patients with less than two years from the onset of cognitive impairment to incapacitation due to dementia. Although RPD is often associated with fatal neurodegenerative diseases, including early‐onset Alzheimer disease or Creutzfeldt‐Jakob disease, treatable forms of RPD are increasingly recognized. Early recognition of patients with potentially treatable causes of RPD is key to the timely provision of therapies required to achieve the best possible long‐term outcomes.Method155 patients with RPD were prospectively enrolled from February 2016 to August 2022 via two tertiary care centers. Etiologic diagnoses were independently assigned by two neurologists with good agreement (>90%). Causes of RPD were further classified as treatment‐responsive or nonresponsive, referencing the extant literature. Demographic, clinical, and paraclinical features associated with treatable causes of RPD were identified using stepwise multivariate logistic regression and validated with 5‐fold cross validation.Result87/155 patients (56.1%) had a potentially treatable cause of RPD, including autoimmune/inflammatory disease (n = 52, 59.8%), vasculitis (n = 13, 14.9%), primary psychiatric disease (n = 4, 4.6%), or nutritional deficiency (n = 4, 4.6%). Multivariable analyses identified seven features that were independently associated with treatment‐responsiveness: age‐at‐symptom onset (OR: 0.62 per decade, 95%CI: 0.42‐0.93), seizures (OR: 9.81, 95%CI: 2.84‐33.89), MRI suggestive of autoimmune encephalitis (OR: 23.08, 95%CI: 2.28‐233.40), CSF white blood cell count ≥10 cells/mm3 (OR: 32.24, 95%CI:5.80‐179.21), movement abnormalities (OR: 4.99, 95%CI: 1.76‐14.10), presence of disease‐associated tumor (OR: 13.82, 95%CI: 2.25‐85.11), and mania (OR: 18.47, 95%CI: 1.76‐193.61). Model performance was excellent (c‐statistic = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.82‐0.94; p<0.001): 71 patients (81.6%) with potentially treatable causes of RPD and 56 patients (82.4%) with non‐treatable causes of RPD were correctly classified (PPV = 85.5%; NPV = 77.8%).ConclusionTreatment‐responsive causes of RPD were common in our series. Younger age, seizures, movement abnormalities, or mania at presentation, and paraclinical tests suggesting inflammation (MRI or CSF) or tumor in patients with RPD should prompt consideration of treatable causes of RPD and initiation of treatment when indicated.

AbstractBackgroundThe causes of rapidly progressive dementia are heterogeneous, including neurodegenerative, vascular, and autoimmune/inflammatory diseases. Overlap in presenting symptoms and signs, results of cognitive testing, and findings on brain imaging and other common diagnostic tests confounds the etiologic diagnosis, contributing to diagnostic delays, missed opportunities for treatment, and poorer outcomes in patients with RPD. New tools and approaches are needed to improve diagnostic accuracy, with particular emphasis on improving early recognition of patients with potentially treatable causes of RPD.MethodsEstablished and emerging biomarkers of Alzheimer disease neuropathology (Aβ42/40, p‐tau181, p‐tau231), neuroaxonal and neuronal injury (neurofilament light [NfL], VILIP‐1, total tau), neuroinflammation (YKL‐40, sTREM2, GFAP, MCP‐1), and synaptic dysfunction (SNAP‐25, neurogranin) were measured in cerebrospinal fluid obtained at presentation from 78 prospectively accrued patients with RPD due to neurodegenerative (n = 35), vascular (n = 9), and autoimmune/inflammatory (n = 34) diseases, and 72 age‐ and sex‐similar cognitively normal individuals (controls). Causes of RPD were further classified as potentially treatment‐responsive or nonresponsive, referencing the extant literature. Biomarker levels were compared across etiologic diagnoses and by treatment responsiveness, referencing control values. Analyses were adjusted for the effects of age (ANCOVA).ResultsAlzheimer disease biomarkers (low Aβ42/40 and elevated p‐tau181 and p‐tau231) were associated with neurodegenerative causes of RPD (ANCOVA, p = 0.02 p = 0.30, p = 0.15), while high NfL (p = 0.61), low VILIP‐1 (p = 0.009), and elevated markers of inflammation (sTREM2, p = 0.009; YKL‐40, p<0.001) identified patients with autoimmune/inflammatory diseases (Figure). MCP‐1 levels were highest in patients with vascular causes of RPD (p = 0.08). 44 patients (56.4%) had potentially treatment‐responsive causes of RPD. Treatment responsiveness was associated with higher levels of CSF Aβ42/40 (p = 0.003), NfL (p<0.001), sTREM2 (p<0.001) and YKL‐40 (p<0.001); and lower levels of p‐tau‐181 and p‐tau231 (p<0.001, p<0.001) and VILIP‐1 (p<0.001).ConclusionSelected biomarkers measured in CSF at presentation associate with etiologic diagnosis and treatment responsiveness in patients with neurodegenerative, vascular, and autoimmune/inflammatory causes of RPD. Biomarker panels may be adapted to improve recognition of patients with treatment‐responsive causes of RPD early in the symptomatic course when treatments may be most effective.