Detecting clinical change with the CDR-FTLD: differences between FTLD and AD dementia

The pursuit for markers of disease progression in behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia: a scoping review to optimize outcome measures for clinical trials

Behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by diverse and prominent changes in behavior and personality. One of the greatest challenges in bvFTD is to capture, measure and predict its disease progression, due to clinical, pathological and genetic heterogeneity. Availability of reliable outcome measures is pivotal for future clinical trials and disease monitoring. Detection of change should be objective, clinically meaningful and easily assessed, preferably associated with a biological process. The purpose of this scoping review is to examine the status of longitudinal studies in bvFTD, evaluate current assessment tools and propose potential progression markers. A systematic literature search (in PubMed and Embase.com) was performed. Literature on disease trajectories and longitudinal validity of frequently-used measures was organized in five domains: global functioning, behavior, (social) cognition, neuroimaging and fluid biomarkers. Evaluating current longitudinal data, we propose an adaptive battery, combining a set of sensitive clinical, neuroimaging and fluid markers, adjusted for genetic and sporadic variants, for adequate detection of disease progression in bvFTD.

Utility of the Japanese version of the Clinical Dementia Rating® plus National Alzheimer's Coordinating Centre Behaviour and Language Domains for sporadic cases of frontotemporal dementia in Japan

BACKGROUND

We aimed to validate the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR®) dementia staging instrument plus the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Centre Behaviour and Language Domains (CDR® plus NACC FTLD) for use in clinical settings in Japan and in the Japanese language.

METHODS

This prospective observational study enrolled 29 patients with frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and 21 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia from the Departments of Psychiatry at Osaka University Hospital and Asakayama General Hospital and the Brain Function Centre at Nippon Life Hospital. CDR® plus NACC FTLD, CDR®, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Western Aphasia Battery (WAB), Neuropsychiatric Inventory-plus (NPI-plus), Stereotypy Rating Inventory (SRI), and frontal behavioural symptom scores obtained from items of NPI-plus and SRI, were conducted to assess inter- and intra-rater reliability, validity, and responsiveness. We performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to evaluate the discriminating power of the Behaviour/Comportment/Personality (BEHAV) and Language (LANG) domains of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD and the MEMORY domain of the CDR® in patients AD dementia and FTD.

RESULTS

The CDR® plus NACC FTLD showed good inter- and intra-rater reliabilities. In patients with FTD, the BEHAV domain of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD was significantly correlated with all clinical measures except for the SRI total score, while the LANG domain of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD was significantly correlated with the MMSE and the WAB-Aphasia quotient. In addition, the CDR® plus NACC FTLD sum of boxes significantly changed after 6 months and after 1 year. ROC curve analysis showed that the BEHAV and LANG domains of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD distinguished between patients with AD dementia and FTD better than the MEMORY domain of the CDR®.

CONCLUSIONS

This study validated the Japanese version of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD with good reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

The Global Deterioration Scale for Down Syndrome Population (GDS-DS): A Rating Scale to Assess the Progression of Alzheimer's Disease

The aim of this study is to adapt and validate the global deterioration scale (GDS) for the systematic tracking of Alzheimer's disease (AD) progression in a population with Down syndrome (DS). A retrospective dual-center cohort study was conducted with 83 participants with DS (46.65 ± 5.08 years) who formed the primary diagnosis (PD) group: cognitive stability (n = 48), mild cognitive impairment (n = 24), and Alzheimer's disease (n = 11). The proposed scale for adults with DS (GDS-DS) comprises six stages, from cognitive and/or behavioral stability to advanced AD. Two neuropsychologists placed the participants of the PD group in each stage of the GDS-DS according to cognitive, behavioral and daily living skills data. Inter-rater reliability in staging with the GDS-DS was excellent (ICC = 0.86; CI: 0.80-0.93), and the agreement with the diagnosis categories of the PD group ranged from substantial to excellent with κ values of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.73-0.92) and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.72, 0.99). Performance with regard to the CAMCOG-DS total score and orientation subtest of the Barcelona test for intellectual disability showed a slight progressive decline across all the GDS-DS stages. The GDS-DS scale is a sensitive tool for staging the progression of AD in the DS population, with special relevance in daily clinical practice.

Sum of boxes of the clinical dementia rating scale highly predicts conversion or reversion in predementia stages

Background

The clinical dementia rating (CDR) scale is commonly used to diagnose dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD). The sum of boxes of the CDR (CDR-SB) has recently been emphasized and applied to interventional trials for tracing the progression of cognitive impairment (CI) in the early stages of AD. We aimed to study the influence of baseline CDR-SB on disease progression to dementia or reversion to normal cognition (NC).

Materials and methods

The baseline CDR < 1 cohort registered from September 2015 to August 2020 with longitudinal follow-up in the History-based Artificial Intelligence Clinical Dementia Diagnostic System (HAICDDS) database was retrospectively analyzed for the rates of conversion to CDR ≥ 1. A Cox regression model was applied to study the influence of CDR-SB levels on progression, adjusting for age, education, sex, neuropsychological tests, neuropsychiatric symptoms, parkinsonism, and multiple vascular risk factors.

Results

A total of 1,827 participants were analyzed, including 1,258 (68.9%) non-converters, and 569 (31.1%) converters with mean follow-up of 2.1 (range 0.4–5.5) and 1.8 (range 0.3–5.0) years, respectively. Conversion rates increased with increasing CDR-SB scores. Compared to a CDR-SB score of 0, the hazard ratios (HR) for conversion to dementia were 1.51, 1.91, 2.58, 2.13, 3.46, 3.85, 3.19, 5.12, and 5.22 for CDR-SB scores of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, and ≥4.5, respectively (all p < 0.05 except for CDR-SB score = 0.5). In addition, older age, lower education, lower cognitive performance, and a history of diabetes also increased conversion rates. Furthermore, reversions to NC were 12.5, 5.6, 0.9, and 0% for CDR-SB scores of 0.5, 1.0–2.0, 2.5–3.5 and ≥4.0, respectively (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

CDR-SB in predementia or very mild dementia (VMD) stages highly predicts progression to dementia or reversion to NC. Therefore, CDR-SB could be a good candidate for tracing the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions in populations without dementia.

The CBI-R detects early behavioural impairment in genetic frontotemporal dementia

INTRODUCTION

Behavioural dysfunction is a key feature of genetic frontotemporal dementia (FTD) but validated clinical scales measuring behaviour are lacking at present.

METHODS

We assessed behaviour using the revised version of the Cambridge Behavioural Inventory (CBI-R) in 733 participants from the Genetic FTD Initiative study: 466 mutation carriers (195 C9orf72, 76 MAPT, 195 GRN) and 267 non-mutation carriers (controls). All mutation carriers were stratified according to their global CDR plus NACC FTLD score into three groups: asymptomatic (CDR = 0), prodromal (CDR = 0.5) and symptomatic (CDR = 1+). Mixed-effects models adjusted for age, education, sex and family clustering were used to compare between the groups. Neuroanatomical correlates of the individual domains were assessed within each genetic group.

RESULTS

CBI-R total scores were significantly higher in all CDR 1+ mutation carrier groups compared with controls [C9orf72 mean 70.5 (standard deviation 27.8), GRN 56.2 (33.5), MAPT 62.1 (36.9)] as well as their respective CDR 0.5 groups [C9orf72 13.5 (14.4), GRN 13.3 (13.5), MAPT 9.4 (10.4)] and CDR 0 groups [C9orf72 6.0 (7.9), GRN 3.6 (6.0), MAPT 8.5 (13.3)]. The C9orf72 and GRN 0.5 groups scored significantly higher than the controls. The greatest impairment was seen in the Motivation domain for the C9orf72 and GRN symptomatic groups, whilst in the symptomatic MAPTgroup, the highest-scoring domains were Stereotypic and Motor Behaviours and Memory and Orientation. Neural correlates of each CBI-R domain largely overlapped across the different mutation carrier groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CBI-R detects early behavioural change in genetic FTD, suggesting that it could be a useful measure within future clinical trials.

Comparison of clinical rating scales in genetic frontotemporal dementia within the GENFI cohort

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic trials are now underway in genetic forms of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) but clinical outcome measures are limited. The two most commonly used measures, the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR)+National Alzheimer's Disease Coordinating Center (NACC) Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (FTLD) and the FTD Rating Scale (FRS), have yet to be compared in detail in the genetic forms of FTD.

METHODS

The CDR+NACC FTLD and FRS were assessed cross-sectionally in 725 consecutively recruited participants from the Genetic FTD Initiative: 457 mutation carriers (77 microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT), 187 GRN, 193 C9orf72) and 268 family members without mutations (non-carrier control group). 231 mutation carriers (51 MAPT, 92 GRN, 88 C9orf72) and 145 non-carriers had available longitudinal data at a follow-up time point.

RESULTS

Cross-sectionally, the mean FRS score was lower in all genetic groups compared with controls: GRN mutation carriers mean 83.4 (SD 27.0), MAPT mutation carriers 78.2 (28.8), C9orf72 mutation carriers 71.0 (34.0), controls 96.2 (7.7), p<0.001 for all comparisons, while the mean CDR+NACC FTLD Sum of Boxes was significantly higher in all genetic groups: GRN mutation carriers mean 2.6 (5.2), MAPT mutation carriers 3.2 (5.6), C9orf72 mutation carriers 4.2 (6.2), controls 0.2 (0.6), p<0.001 for all comparisons. Mean FRS score decreased and CDR+NACC FTLD Sum of Boxes increased with increasing disease severity within each individual genetic group. FRS and CDR+NACC FTLD Sum of Boxes scores were strongly negatively correlated across all mutation carriers (r_s=-0.77, p<0.001) and within each genetic group (r_s=-0.67 to -0.81, p<0.001 in each group). Nonetheless, discrepancies in disease staging were seen between the scales, and with each scale and clinician-judged symptomatic status. Longitudinally, annualised change in both FRS and CDR+NACC FTLD Sum of Boxes scores initially increased with disease severity level before decreasing in those with the most severe disease: controls -0.1 (6.0) for FRS, -0.1 (0.4) for CDR+NACC FTLD Sum of Boxes, asymptomatic mutation carriers -0.5 (8.2), 0.2 (0.9), prodromal disease -2.3 (9.9), 0.6 (2.7), mild disease -10.2 (18.6), 3.0 (4.1), moderate disease -9.6 (16.6), 4.4 (4.0), severe disease -2.7 (8.3), 1.7 (3.3). Sample sizes were calculated for a trial of prodromal mutation carriers: over 180 participants per arm would be needed to detect a moderate sized effect (30%) for both outcome measures, with sample sizes lower for the FRS.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the FRS and CDR+NACC FTLD measure disease severity in genetic FTD mutation carriers throughout the timeline of their disease, although the FRS may be preferable as an outcome measure. However, neither address a number of key symptoms in the FTD spectrum, for example, motor and neuropsychiatric deficits, which future scales will need to incorporate.

Disease Progression in Frontotemporal Dementia and Alzheimer Disease: The Contribution of Staging Scales

INTRODUCTION

There is a shortage of validated instruments to estimate disease progression in frontotemporal dementia (FTD).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the ability of the FTD Rating Scale (FTD-FRS) to detect functional and behavioral changes in patients diagnosed with the behavioral variant of FTD (bvFTD), primary progressive aphasia (PPA), and Alzheimer disease (AD) after 12 months of the initial evaluation, compared to the Clinical Dementia Rating scale-frontotemporal lobar degeneration (CDR-FTLD) and the original Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR).

METHODS

The sample consisted of 70 individuals, aged 40+ years, with at least 2 years of schooling, 31 with the diagnosis of bvFTD, 12 with PPA (8 with semantic variant and 4 with non-fluent variant), and 27 with AD. The FTD-FRS, the CDR, and the 2 additional CDR-FTLD items were completed by a clinician, based on the information provided by the caregiver with frequent contact with the patient. The Addenbrooke Cognitive Examination-Revised was completed by patients. After 12 months, the same protocol was applied.

RESULTS

The FTD-FRS, CDR-FTLD, and CDR detected significant decline after 12 months in the 3 clinical groups (exception: FTD-FRS for PPA). The CDR was less sensitive to severe disease stages.

CONCLUSIONS

The FTD-FRS and the CDR-FTLD are especially useful tools for dementia staging in AD and in the FTD spectrum.

Clinical Phenotypes of Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia by Age at Onset

Background:

Behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is generally considered a young-onset dementia, although age at onset is highly variable. While several studies indicate clinical differences regarding age at onset, no biomarker validated cohort studies with updated clinical criteria have been performed.

Objective:

We aimed to examine behavior, cognition, and mortality over the full age spectrum in a cohort of bvFTD patients with neuroimaging, genetic, or histopathological confirmation and exclusion of positive Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers or severe cerebrovascular damage.

Methods:

In total, 315 patients with a clinical diagnosis of probable or definite bvFTD were included from the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort and grouped into quartiles by age-at-diagnosis. Neuropsychiatric symptoms and cognitive functioning were assessed with the neuropsychiatric inventory, the geriatric depression scale and a neuropsychological test battery. Data on mortality was obtained from the Dutch municipal register. Associations between age-at-diagnosis and clinical features and mortality risk were examined.

Results:

Age-at-diagnosis ranged from 26 to 85 years and established quartiles with mean ages of 52±6, 61±2, 66±2, and 74±3 years. In the total sample, 44.4%exceeded an age of 65 years at time of diagnosis. Earlier age-at-diagnosis was associated with more severe behavioral symptoms, while later age-at-diagnosis was associated with more severe memory impairment. Unexpectedly, mortality risk was not associated with age-at-diagnosis.

Conclusion:

In bvFTD, symptom profile is associated with age-at-diagnosis. This should be taken into account with regard to diagnostics, patient management, and trial design. Additionally, based on our sample, the prevalence of late-onset bvFTD is higher than generally thought.

Telemedicine for Delivery of Care in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration During COVID-19 Pandemic: Results from Southern Italy

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic is changing clinical practice in neurology, after the governments decided the introduction of social distancing and interruption of medical non-emergency services in many countries. Teleneurology is an effective tool for the remote evaluation of patients but its adoption for frontotemporal lobar dementia (FTD) is in a preliminary stage.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated multidisciplinary assessment of patients with FTD using telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

All patients received a diagnosis of FTD during 2018-2019 according to international criteria. A structured questionnaire and Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR)-FTD were used by the neurologist with patients and/or caregivers. Index symptoms of COVID-19 infection were searched.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight clinical interviews were completed with caregivers and four with both patients/caregivers. Most patients and caregivers were satisfied with the neurological interview and expressed their willingness to continue to be included in remote evaluation programs (90%). Fifty percent of patients experienced significant worsening of clinical picture and quality of life since the start of social distancing. The CDR-FTD scale revealed a significant worsening of behavior (p = 0.01) and language functions (p = 0.009), compared to the last in-person evaluation at the center. One patient presented index symptoms of COVID-19 infection and was confirmed to be positive for COVID-19 with pharyngeal swab.

CONCLUSION

The study was conducted in Italy, one of the countries hit particularly hard by the COVID-19 pandemic, with interruption of all non-emergency medical services. Our study indicates that telemedicine is a valid tool to triage patients with FTD to increase practice outreach and efficiency.

Utility of the global CDR® plus NACC FTLD rating and development of scoring rules: Data from the ARTFL/LEFFTDS Consortium

INTRODUCTION

We created global rating scoring rules for the CDR® plus NACC FTLD to detect and track early frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and to conduct clinical trials in FTLD.

METHODS

The CDR plus NACC FTLD rating was applied to 970 sporadic and familial participants from the baseline visit of Advancing Research and Treatment in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration (ARTFL)/Longitudinal Evaluation of Familial Frontotemporal Dementia Subjects (LEFFTDS). Each of the eight domains of the CDR plus NACC FTLD was equally weighed in determining the global score. An interrater reliability study was completed for 40 participants.

RESULTS

The CDR plus NACC FTLD showed very good interrater reliability. It was especially useful in detecting clinical features of mild non-fluent/agrammatic variant primary progressive aphasia participants.

DISCUSSION

The global CDR plus NACC FTLD score could be an attractive outcome measure for clinical trials in symptomatic FTLD, and may be useful in natural history studies and clinical trials in FTLD spectrum disorders.

Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III: Psychometric Characteristics and Relations to Functional Ability in Dementia

OBJECTIVES

The Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE) is a common cognitive screening test for dementia. Here, we examined the relationship between the most recent version (ACE-III) and its predecessor (ACE-R), determined ACE-III cutoff scores for the detection of dementia, and explored its relationship with functional ability.

METHODS

Study 1 included 199 dementia patients and 52 healthy controls who completed the ACE-III and ACE-R. ACE-III total and domain scores were regressed on their corresponding ACE-R values to obtain conversion formulae. Study 2 included 331 mixed dementia patients and 87 controls to establish the optimal ACE-III cutoff scores for the detection of dementia using receiver operator curve analysis. Study 3 included 194 dementia patients and their carers to investigate the relationship between ACE-III total score and functional ability.

RESULTS

Study 1: ACE-III and ACE-R scores differed by ≤1 point overall, the magnitude varying according to dementia type. Study 2: a new lower bound cutoff ACE-III score of 84/100 to detect dementia was identified (compared with 82 for the ACE-R). The upper bound cutoff score of 88/100 was retained. Study 3: ACE-III scores were significantly related to functional ability on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale across all dementia syndromes, except for semantic dementia.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents one of the largest and most clinically diverse investigations of the ACE-III. Our results demonstrate that the ACE-III is an acceptable alternative to the ACE-R. In addition, ACE-III performance has broader clinical implications in that it relates to carer reports of functional impairment in most common dementias. (JINS, 2018, 24, 854-863).

Detecting clinical change with the CDR-FTLD: differences between FTLD and AD dementia

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the psychometric properties of the Clinical Dementia Scale-frontotemporal lobar degeneration (CDR-FTLD) psychometric properties using Rasch analysis and its sensitivity distinguishing disease progression between FTLD and Alzheimer's disease (AD).

METHODS

Of 603 consecutive patients from the National Alzheimer Coordinating Center dataset (FTLD = 350; AD = 253), 120 FTLDs were included in a Rasch analysis to verify CDR-FTLD psychometric properties; 483 (FTLD = 230; AD = 253) were included to analyse disease progression, with 195 (FTLD = 82; AD = 113) followed-up (24 months).

RESULTS

The CDR-FTLD demonstrated good consistency, construct and concurrent validity and correlated well with mini-mental state examination (MMSE) and disease duration (ps < 0.05). At baseline, FTLD showed greater dementia severity than AD after matched for MMSE and disease duration (p < 0.001). Independent Rasch analyses demonstrated different patterns of progression for FTLD and AD in terms of the domains initially and then subsequently affected with disease progression. At follow-up, although MMSE showed significant changes (p < 0.05), these were greater on the CDR-FTLD (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The CDR-FTLD satisfactorily measures dementia severity and change in FTLD, distinguishing disease progression between FTLD and AD, with clear implications for care, prognosis and future clinical trials. © 2016 The Authors. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.