Citations

Background/Aim: Despite existing diagnostic criteria for Charles Bonnet syndrome (CBS), clinical manifestations vary greatly. We examined the clinical course and mortality of patients diagnosed with CBS. Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with CBS. We collected demographic and clinical information and medical burden scores. Kaplan-Meier mortality curves were compared using log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard model was used for multivariate analysis and hazard ratio (HR). Mortality was compared to expected mortality from Minnesota population. Results: Seventy-seven patients with CBS had a mean age of 79.5 (standard deviation ± 13.0) and were predominantly Caucasian (97%) and female (73%). In all, 20 (26%) subsequently developed a dementia syndrome, most often Lewy body. A total of 46 (60%) deaths occurred with an average follow-up time of 33.0 months. Characteristics associated with mortality included older age (75-84 [HR 3.34, P = .029], >85 [HR 4.58, P = .007]) and renal disease (HR 3.39 with 95% confidence interval 1.31-8.80, P = .012). Medical burden scores were not associated with overall mortality. Mortality was high compared to Minnesota population ( P < .0001). Conclusions: A large proportion of patients with CBS developed dementia, and there was a high mortality rate associated with older age and renal disease. Medical burden was not associated with mortality.

Abstract Posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) is a clinicoradiologic syndrome characterized by progressive decline in visual processing skills, relatively intact memory and language in the early stages, and atrophy of posterior brain regions. Misdiagnosis of PCA is common, owing not only to its relative rarity and unusual and variable presentation, but also because patients frequently first seek the opinion of an ophthalmologist, who may note normal eye examinations by their usual tests but may not appreciate cortical brain dysfunction. Seeking to raise awareness of the disease, stimulate research, and promote collaboration, a multidisciplinary group of PCA research clinicians formed an international working party, which had its first face‐to‐face meeting on July 13, 2012 in Vancouver, Canada, prior to the Alzheimer's Association International Conference.

ObjectiveThe new criteria for preclinical Alzheimer disease (AD) proposed 3 stages: abnormal levels of β‐amyloid (stage 1), stage 1 plus evidence of brain injury (stage 2), and stage 2 plus subtle cognitive changes (stage 3). However, a large group of subjects with normal β‐amyloid biomarkers have evidence of brain injury; we labeled them as the “suspected non‐Alzheimer pathophysiology” (sNAP) group. The characteristics of the sNAP group are poorly understood.MethodsUsing the preclinical AD classification, 430 cognitively normal subjects from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging who underwent brain magnetic resonance (MR), 18fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG), and Pittsburgh compound B positron emission tomography (PET) were evaluated for FDG PET regional volumetrics, MR regional brain volumetrics, white matter hyperintensity volume, and number of infarcts. We examined cross‐sectional associations across AD preclinical stages, those with all biomarkers normal, and the sNAP group.ResultsThe sNAP group had a lower proportion (14%) with apolipoprotein E ε4 genotype than the preclinical AD stages 2 + 3. The sNAP group did not show any group differences compared to stages 2 + 3 of the preclinical AD group on measures of FDG PET regional hypometabolism, MR regional brain volume loss, cerebrovascular imaging lesions, vascular risk factors, imaging changes associated with α‐synucleinopathy, or physical findings of parkinsonism.InterpretationCognitively normal persons with brain injury biomarker abnormalities, with or without abnormal levels of β‐amyloid, were indistinguishable on a variety of imaging markers, clinical features, and risk factors. The initial appearance of brain injury biomarkers that occurs in cognitively normal persons with preclinical AD may not depend on β‐amyloidosis. ANN NEUROL 2013;73:472–480

Frontotemporal degeneration (FTD) encompasses a spectrum of related neurodegenerative disorders with behavioral, language, and motor phenotypes for which there are currently no effective therapies. This is the second of two articles that summarize the presentations and discussions that occurred at two symposia in 2011 sponsored by the Frontotemporal Degeneration Treatment Study Group, a collaborative group of academic and industry researchers that is devoted to developing treatments for FTD. This article discusses the current status of FTD clinical research that is relevant to the conduct of clinical trials, and why FTD research may be an attractive pathway for developing therapies for neurodegenerative disorders. The clinical and molecular features of FTD, including rapid disease progression and relatively pure molecular pathology, suggest that there are advantages to developing drugs for FTD as compared with other dementias. FTD qualifies as orphan indication, providing additional advantages for drug development. Two recent sets of consensus diagnostic criteria will facilitate the identification of patients with FTD, and a variety of neuropsychological, functional, and behavioral scales have been shown to be sensitive to disease progression. Moreover, quantitative neuroimaging measurements demonstrate progressive brain atrophy in FTD at rates that may surpass Alzheimer's disease. Finally, the similarities between FTD and other neurodegenerative diseases with drug development efforts already underway suggest that FTD researchers will be able to draw on this experience to create a road map for FTD drug development. We conclude that FTD research has reached sufficient maturity to pursue clinical development of specific FTD therapies.