Assessment of Individuals with Primary Progressive Aphasia

"Staying connected": Speech-language pathologists' perspectives on the communication needs of people with primary progressive aphasia and their family members

PURPOSE

The research objectives were to explore the communication needs pertaining to (a) people with primary progressive aphasia (PwPPA); (b) family members of PwPPA; and (c) the different variants of primary progressive aphasia (PPA), from the perspectives of speech-language pathologists (SLPs).

METHOD

This investigation used a qualitatively driven concurrent mixed methods research design. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews and mixed methods questionnaires with 14 SLPs. Qualitative content analysis of interview and questionnaire data was used to identify codes and categories related to the research objectives. Quantitative analysis of questionnaire data involved single item summaries and cross item tabulations.

RESULT

Analysis revealed eight categories of communication need pertaining to PwPPA and six pertaining to their family members. Results regarding communication needs according to variant of PPA revealed limited findings.

CONCLUSION

SLPs perceived several important areas of communication need for PwPPA and their family members, highlighting key clinical implications for proactive communication care across the continuum of care. Future research can build on the current findings and integrate the perspectives of PwPPA and their family members on this topic, to develop interventions and explore models of service delivery to meet their progressive and complex communication needs.

Applications of the R.A.I.S.E. Assessment Framework to Support the Process of Assessment in Primary Progressive Aphasia

PURPOSE

To establish the extent to which person-centered processes are integrated in assessment procedures, the Relationship, Assessment, Inclusion, Support, Evolve (R.A.I.S.E.) Assessment framework was used to evaluate measures that are typically used when assessing people living with primary progressive aphasia (PPA).

METHOD

Forty-five assessment tools were evaluated through the lens of the five R.A.I.S.E. principles: building the client-clinician Relationship, Assessment choices, Including the client and care partners, providing Support, and Evolving procedures to match client capability and progression. The principles were operationalized as questions for raters to evaluate whether a measure met this aspect of the R.A.I.S.E. Assessment framework.

RESULTS

Ten measures commonly used in the assessment of people living with PPA met all R.A.I.S.E. principles. These measures centered upon the elicitation of naturalistic discourse, conversation, client self-report, and clinician ratings. Thirteen measures did not meet any of the criteria, and represented standardized evaluation procedures do not provide the opportunity to connect to the client, elicit or provide feedback or support, nor to adapt in response to need or performance.

CONCLUSIONS

Whether using standardized or informal assessment tools, a relational and qualitative approach to providing assessment is paramount to promote client success and therapeutic engagement. We provide guidance through the R.A.I.S.E. framework on practices to cultivate person-centered processes of assessment in the care of people living with PPA.

Efficacy of Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors in the Logopenic Variant of Primary Progressive Aphasia

INTRODUCTION

For over 25 years, cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) have been the main symptomatic treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Several meta-analyses have supported their effectiveness in various neurocognitive, functional, and behavioral aspects of amnestic AD. Over 86% of cases of the logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA), also named language variant AD, are caused by a similar pathologic process than AD, yet no study has examined the efficacy of ChEIs in this AD variant. We aimed to explore the efficacy of ChEIs in the treatment of lvPPA by comparing their evolution on the MMSE, and other functional and behavioral parameters, to that of treated amnestic AD patients.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed in 45 patients with lvPPA and 52 patients with amnestic AD. Both groups were similar in terms of age, level of education, and onset of symptoms. Drug history and MMSE scores, as well as functional (activities of daily living [ADLs] and instrumental activities of daily living [IADLs]), neurocognitive and neuropsychiatric symptoms were collected on several time points before and after the introduction of ChEIs. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and a generalized linear mixed model.

RESULTS

Patients with lvPPA showed a similar trajectory of decline than amnestic AD patients on serial MMSEs up to 12-24 months after the introduction of ChEIs. There was a significant impact on ADLs but not IADLs and neuropsychiatric symptoms remained stable over time.

CONCLUSION

This study provides preliminary evidence for efficacy of ChEIs in patients with lvPPA and suggests similar benefits to those seen in amnestic AD patients, hence reassuring patients and their physicians.

Dysfluency in primary progressive aphasia: Temporal speech parameters

Analysing spontaneous speech in individuals experiencing fluency difficulties holds potential for diagnosing speech and language disorders, including Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA). Dysfluency in the spontaneous speech of patients with PPA has mostly been described in terms of abnormal pausing behaviour, but the temporal features related to speech have drawn little attention. This study compares speech-related fluency parameters in the three main variants of PPA and in typical speech. Forty-three adults participated in this research, thirteen with the logopenic variant of PPA (lvPPA), ten with the non-fluent variant (nfvPPA), nine with the semantic variant (svPPA), and eleven who were healthy age-matched adults. Participants' fluency was assessed through a picture description task from which 42 parameters were computed including syllable duration, speaking pace, the duration of speech chunks (i.e. interpausal units, IPU), and the number of linguistic units per IPU and per second. The results showed that each PPA variant exhibited abnormal speech characteristics reflecting various underlying factors, from motor speech deficits to higher-level issues. Out of the 42 parameters considered, 37 proved useful for characterising dysfluency in the three main PPA variants and 35 in distinguishing among them. Therefore, taking into account not only pausing behaviour but also temporal speech parameters can provide a fuller understanding of dysfluency in PPA. However, no single parameter by itself sufficed to distinguish one PPA group from the other two, further evidence that dysfluency is not dichotomous but rather multidimensional, and that complementary multiparametric analyses are needed.

Primary progressive aphasia: six questions in search of an answer

Here, we review recent progress in the diagnosis and management of primary progressive aphasia-the language-led dementias. We pose six key unanswered questions that challenge current assumptions and highlight the unresolved difficulties that surround these diseases. How many syndromes of primary progressive aphasia are there-and is syndromic diagnosis even useful? Are these truly 'language-led' dementias? How can we diagnose (and track) primary progressive aphasia better? Can brain pathology be predicted in these diseases? What is their core pathophysiology? In addition, how can primary progressive aphasia best be treated? We propose that pathophysiological mechanisms linking proteinopathies to phenotypes may help resolve the clinical complexity of primary progressive aphasia, and may suggest novel diagnostic tools and markers and guide the deployment of effective therapies.

Role of the Speech-Language Therapist/Pathologist in Primary Progressive Aphasia

In recent years, the role of the speech-language therapist/pathologist (SLT/P) has become increasingly established in the assessment, care, and management of primary progressive aphasia (PPA). Throughout the progression of the condition, the role of SLT/P encompasses 5 notable domains: behavioral assessment, impairment-based intervention, compensatory strategy intervention, communication partner training, and informational counseling. The SLT/P brings a unique perspective and clinical arsenal to address the linguistic, functional, and psychosocial effects that PPA can have on a person's life. Ongoing training opportunities are warranted to deliver evidence-based and person-centered SLT/P services to people living with PPA. Therefore, in this commentary, our aim is to clarify the role of SLT/P to advocate for our patients and their options for care.

Access, referral, service provision and management of individuals with primary progressive aphasia: A survey of speech-language therapists in Italy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In Italy, approximately 650 individuals receive a diagnosis of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) every year. Unfortunately, the frequency with which patients are referred to speech-language services is suboptimal, likely due to skepticism regarding the value of speech-language therapy in the context of neurodegeneration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a virtual survey of speech and language therapists (SLTs) across Italy, to collect information about the assessment, intervention and management of patients with PPA. To ensure that as many SLTs as possible received the survey, the Italian Federation of SLTs (Federazione Logopedisti Italiani, FLI) aided in disseminating the survey.

RESULTS

In total, 336 respondents participated in the online survey, 140 of whom had previous experience with PPA patients. Respondents indicated having seen a total of 428 PPA patients in the previous 24 months (three patients on average, range: 0-40). SLTs who reported never working with PPA identified underdiagnoses, low referral rates and the rarity of the clinical syndrome as major reasons for their lack of experience with PPA. SLTs with experience working with PPA indicated that patients may not have accessed services because of service dysfunction and geographical barriers. Respondents reported using informal interviews during assessments and tests developed for post-stroke aphasia, while impairment-based/restitutive interventions were utilised most often.

CONCLUSION

Findings may serve to inform health policy organisations regarding the current shortcomings and needed recommendations for improving the care of individuals with PPA in Italy. Improving awareness of the utility of rehabilitation among SLTs and other clinical service providers may serve to facilitate access to intervention, which in turn will serve to better support individuals living with PPA.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Speech and language therapists (SLTs) play a crucial role in the assessment, diagnosis and treatment of people with primary progressive aphasia (PPA). However, the frequency with which individuals with PPA are referred for speech and language services is suboptimal due to skepticism regarding the value of speech and language therapy in the context of neurodegeneration, the scarcity of SLTs with expertise in the treatment of PPA and the lack of awareness of the SLT role amongst referrers. What this paper adds to existing knowledge In recognition of the lack of published information on the provision of speech and language therapy services and clinicians' approaches to the assessment and treatment of individuals with PPA in Italy, we conducted an online survey to evaluate the current referral patterns for speech and language therapy services and to examine the current barriers to access these services for individuals with PPA in Italy. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The data presented here support that SLTs view treatment as useful for individuals with PPA and other professional figures and may serve to improve access to intervention, which in turn will serve to better support individuals living with PPA. The results highlight the need to inform health policy organisations about current gaps and aid in developing recommendations for improving the care of individuals with PPA, in order to understand how SLTs can best support individuals with PPA and their families.

"Please Don't Assess Him to Destruction": The R.A.I.S.E. Assessment Framework for Primary Progressive Aphasia

PURPOSE

Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) assess people with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) through measurements of speech, language, communication, and well-being, with the aims of identifying challenges and strengths, monitoring change, and informing treatment directions and supports. The purpose of this clinical focus article is to highlight the necessity for person-centered assessment specific to PPA and to conceptualize a framework that acknowledges the multifaceted nature of assessment for this population. In this framework, the unique challenges posed by a diagnosis of PPA are addressed with the aim to provide practical guidance for clinicians and to support reflection on current practices.

METHOD

In clinical and research practice, assessment of people with PPA requires an ever-evolving approach that is centered on the client. In this clinical focus article, a discussion-based consensus process was used to synthesize authentic longitudinal experiences of people with PPA to explore assessment approaches, tools, and philosophies.

RESULTS

This analysis of person-centered assessment identifies seven essential components of assessment in PPA that set the foundation for the five steps of the R.A.I.S.E. Assessment framework. These components each contribute to a clear definition of assessment that reveals clients' competencies with a strengths-based focus; prioritizes the reciprocity of benefits; promotes dynamic assessment; and recognizes the complexity, evolution of assessment over time, and advocacy.

CONCLUSIONS

This clinical focus article takes a novel look at assessment in PPA by stepping away from assessment practices that focus on revealing deficits and decline and, instead, provides practical recommendations through the conceptualization of a PPA-specific assessment framework. The R.A.I.S.E. Assessment framework is grounded in principles of uplifting clients through person-centered assessment, keeps pace with best practice in PPA intervention, and contributes to a supportive experience for clients and families in the face of a progressive diagnosis over time.

Baseline Conceptual-Semantic Impairment Predicts Longitudinal Treatment Effects for Anomia in Primary Progressive Aphasia and Alzheimer's Disease

Background

An individual's diagnostic subtype may fail to predict the efficacy of a given type of treatment for anomia. Classification by conceptual-semantic impairment may be more informative.

Aims

This study examined the effects of conceptual-semantic impairment and diagnostic subtype on anomia treatment effects in primary progressive aphasia (PPA) and Alzheimer's disease (AD).

Methods & Procedures

At baseline, the picture and word versions of the Pyramids and Palm Trees and Kissing and Dancing tests were used to measure conceptual-semantic processing. Based on norming that was conducted with unimpaired older adults, participants were classified as being impaired on both the picture and word versions (i.e., modality-general conceptual-semantic impairment), the picture version (Objects or Actions) only (i.e., visual-conceptual impairment), the word version (Nouns or Verbs) only (i.e., lexical-semantic impairment), or neither the picture nor the word version (i.e., no impairment). Following baseline testing, a lexical treatment and a semantic treatment were administered to all participants. The treatment stimuli consisted of nouns and verbs that were consistently named correctly at baseline (Prophylaxis items) and/or nouns and verbs that were consistently named incorrectly at baseline (Remediation items). Naming accuracy was measured at baseline, and it was measured at three, seven, eleven, fourteen, eighteen, and twenty-one months.

Outcomes & Results

Compared to baseline naming performance, lexical and semantic treatments both improved naming accuracy for treated Remediation nouns and verbs. For Prophylaxis items, lexical treatment was effective for both nouns and verbs, and semantic treatment was effective for verbs, but the pattern of results was different for nouns -- the effect of semantic treatment was initially nonsignificant or marginally significant, but it was significant beginning at 11 Months, suggesting that the effects of prophylactic semantic treatment may become more apparent as the disorder progresses. Furthermore, the interaction between baseline Conceptual-Semantic Impairment and the Treatment Condition (Lexical vs. Semantic) was significant for verb Prophylaxis items at 3 and 18 Months, and it was significant for noun Prophylaxis items at 14 and 18 Months.

Conclusions

The pattern of results suggested that individuals who have modality-general conceptual-semantic impairment at baseline are more likely to benefit from lexical treatment, while individuals who have unimpaired conceptual-semantic processing at baseline are more likely to benefit from semantic treatment as the disorder progresses. In contrast to conceptual-semantic impairment, diagnostic subtype did not typically predict the treatment effects.

Neuroanatomical correlates of screening for aphasia in NeuroDegeneration (SAND) battery in non-fluent/agrammatic variant of primary progressive aphasia

Background

Non-fluent/agrammatic variant of Primary Progressive Aphasia (avPPA) is primarily characterized by language impairment due to atrophy of the inferior frontal gyrus and the insula cortex in the dominant hemisphere. The Screening for Aphasia in NeuroDegeneration (SAND) battery has been recently proposed as a screening tool for PPA, with several tasks designed to be specific for different language features. Applying multivariate approaches to neuroimaging data and verbal fluency tasks, Aachener Aphasie Test (AAT) naming subtest and SAND data may help in elucidating the neuroanatomical correlates of language deficits in avPPA.

Objective

To investigate the neuroanatomical correlates of language deficits in avPPA using verbal fluency tasks, AAT naming subtest and SAND scores as proxies of brain structural imaging abnormalities.

Methods

Thirty-one avPPA patients were consecutively enrolled and underwent extensive neuropsychological assessment and MRI scan. Raw scores of verbal fluency tasks, AAT naming subtest, and SAND subtests, namely living and non-living picture naming, auditory sentence comprehension, single-word comprehension, words and non-words repetition and sentence repetition, were used as proxies to explore structural (gray matter volume) neuroanatomical correlates. We assessed univariate (voxel-based morphometry, VBM) as well as multivariate (source-based morphometry, SBM) approaches. Age, gender, educational level, and disease severity were considered nuisance variables.

Results

SAND picture naming (total, living and non-living scores) and AAT naming scores showed a direct correlation with the left temporal network derived from SBM. At univariate analysis, the left middle temporal gyrus was directly correlated with SAND picture naming (total and non-living scores) and AAT naming score. When words and non-words repetition (total score) was considered, a direct correlation with the left temporal network (SBM) and with the left fusiform gyrus (VBM) was also evident.

Conclusion

Naming impairments that characterize avPPA are related to specific network-based involvement of the left temporal network, potentially expanding our knowledge on the neuroanatomical basis of this neurodegenerative condition.

Sentence Comprehension in Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Study of the Application of the Brazilian Version of the Test for the Reception of Grammar (TROG2-Br)

Sentence-comprehension deficits have been described in patients with primary progressive aphasia (PPA). However, most instruments to address this domain in more detail and in a clinical context have not been adapted and translated into several languages, posing limitations to clinical practice and cross-language research.

Objectives

The study aimed to (1) test the applicability of the Brazilian version of the Test for Reception of Grammar (TROG2-Br) to detect morphosyntactic deficits in patients with PPA; (2) investigate the association between performance in the test and sociodemographic and clinical variables (age, years of formal education, and disease duration); (3) characterize the performance of individuals presenting with the three more common variants of PPA (non-fluent, semantic, and logopenic) and mixed PPA (PPA-Mx) and analyze whether TROG-2 may assist in the distinction of these clinical profiles.

Methods

A total of 74 cognitively healthy participants and 34 individuals diagnosed with PPA were assessed with TROG2-Br. Overall scores (correct items, passed blocks), types, and categories of errors were analyzed.

Results

In controls, block scores were significantly correlated with years of formal education (Spearman's r = 0.33, p = 004) but not with age. In PPA, age, education, and disease duration were not significantly associated with performance in the test. Controls presented a significantly higher performance on TROG2-Br compared to PPA individuals and their errors pattern pointed to mild general cognitive processing difficulties (attention, working memory). PPA error types pointed to processing and morphosyntactic deficits in nonfluent or agrammatic PPA, (PPA-NF/A), logopenic PPA (PPA-L), and PPA-Mx. The semantic PPA (PPA-S) subgroup was qualitatively more similar to controls (processing difficulties and lower percentage of morphosyntactic errors). TROG2-Br presented good internal consistency and concurrent validity.

Discussion

Our results corroborate findings with TROG-2 in other populations. The performance of typical older adults with heterogeneous levels of education is discussed along with recommendations for clinical use of the test and future directions of research.

Behavioral interventions for primary progressive aphasia

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a neurodegenerative syndrome characterized by a gradual loss of communication ability. Due to the centrality of communication deficits, speech-language pathologists play a prominent role in the provision of care for individuals with PPA. In this chapter, we outline a person-centered approach to the management of PPA that aims to preserve independence for as long as possible while anticipating future decline in communication and other domains. A growing evidence base supports the utility of speech-language treatment approaches in PPA, including restitutive, compensatory, and communication partner-focused techniques. Restitutive interventions aim to rebuild lost communication skills, such as naming or fluent speech production. Compensatory approaches include training with high- and low-tech augmentative and alternative communication systems that provide complementary means of communication beyond speech. Communication partner interventions focus on education and strategy training in order to equip conversation partners as skilled communication facilitators. Throughout intervention, clinicians should aim to provide treatment that impacts functional communication and promotes social engagement. Given the documented benefits of speech-language intervention in PPA, we are optimistic that such treatment will become the standard of care and that additional research will continue to improve the quality and accessibility of behavioral interventions.

The Diagnostic Value of Language Screening in Primary Progressive Aphasia: Validation and Application of the Sydney Language Battery

PURPOSE

The three variants of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) differ in clinical presentation, underlying brain pathology, and clinical course, which stresses the need for early differentiation. However, brief cognitive tests that validly distinguish between all PPA variants are lacking. The Sydney Language Battery (SYDBAT) is a promising screening instrument that can be used as a first step in a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment to distinguish PPA subtypes, but evidence on its validity and reliability is to date limited. In the current study, the validation and diagnostic value of the SYDBAT are described for discriminating PPA subtypes as well as distinguishing PPA from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or Alzheimer's dementia (AD).

METHOD

Forty-five patients with PPA (13 with semantic PPA, 20 with logopenic PPA, and 12 with nonfluent/agrammatic PPA), 25 MCI patients, 13 AD patients, and 50 cognitively unimpaired controls were included in this study. Both patients and controls completed the SYDBAT-NL (Dutch version). Performance on and predictive ability of the four subtests (i.e., Naming, Word Comprehension, Repetition, and Semantic Association) were assessed. In addition, construct validity and internal consistency were examined.

RESULTS

Different SYDBAT performance patterns were found across PPA and non-PPA patient groups. While a discriminant function analysis based on SYDBAT subtest scores could predict PPA subtype with 78% accuracy, it was more difficult to disentangle PPA from non-PPA patients based on SYDBAT scores alone. For assisting in clinical interpretation, simple rules were set up and translated into a diagnostic decision tree for subtyping PPA, which was capable of diagnosing a large proportion of the cases. Satisfying validity and reliability measures were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The SYDBAT is an easy-to-use and promising screen for assessing single-word language processes, which may contribute to the differential diagnostic process of PPA and the assessment of language impairment in MCI and AD. It can be easily implemented for initial screening of patients in a memory clinic.

Clinical and neuroimaging characteristics of primary progressive aphasia

The chapter covers the clinical syndrome of a primary progressive aphasia (PPA), the demographics of this rare neurodegenerative disease, defining clinical and neuroanatomic characteristics of each PPA variant, disease progression, and behavioral features. The chapter begins with a brief introduction that includes references to seminal papers that defined this clinical syndrome and its three variants. The classic PPA subtypes discussed in the chapter are semantic variant PPA (svPPA), nonfluent/agrammatic PPA (nfaPPA), and logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA). The key language and cognitive characteristics, and language tasks that can elicit these language impairments, are detailed. Overlap in the clinical profiles of the PPA variants, which make differential diagnosis challenging, are explained. Disease progression is described, revealing that the PPA variants become more similar over time. Although PPA is language-predominant dementia, there are behavioral manifestations, particularly in svPPA. Changes in behavior in this variant are addressed as well as behavioral changes in nfaPPA and lvPPA that are less well recognized. The patterns of atrophy in the left temporal, parietal, and/or frontal cortices unique to each PPA variant are described. The underlying neuropathologies of the PPA variants are discussed, specifically tauopathies and non-tauopathies associated with svPPA and nfaPPA and Alzheimer's disease pathology in lvPPA.

Italian translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Progressive Aphasia Severity Scale

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a neurodegenerative disease characterised by a progressive decline in language and speech as the first clinical manifestation, which mostly spares other cognitive functions. However, the linguistic impairment of PPA shows different features than that resulting from cerebrovascular diseases. The major difference between the linguistic manifestations of PPA and the traditional classification of aphasias has led to the development of new, more specific methods of language assessment. Among the currently available tools, there has been great interest in the Progressive Aphasia Severity Scale (PASS). This quick and easy-to-use clinical tool allows to collect significant information from caregivers about the communicative, linguistic, and functional difficulties of patients affected by PPA. In addition to monitoring the severity and progression of deficits in 13 different language domains, this scale integrates the classic "clinically reported" assessment with a "caregiver-reported" analysis of the daily experience of the patient, which provides a better understanding of how the disease affects the quality of life of both the patient and the caregiver. In the present contribution, the PASS was translated and adapted into Italian according to the international guidelines for the cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. This version of the PASS can help clinicians and researchers in the diagnosis of PPA in Italian clinical populations. Furthermore, it could be particularly useful for the long-term evaluation of the disease, in order to monitor its evolution, and might represent an optimal means to verify the efficacy of speech/language therapy in delaying the progression of the disease.

Identification of the main components of spontaneous speech in primary progressive aphasia and their neural underpinnings using multimodal MRI and FDG-PET imaging

BACKGROUND

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a clinical syndrome characterized by gradual loss of language skills. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic capacity of a connected speech task for the diagnosis of PPA and its variants, to determine the main components of spontaneous speech, and to examine their neural correlates.

METHODS

A total of 118 participants (31 patients with nfvPPA, 11 with svPPA, 45 with lvPPA, and 31 healthy controls) were evaluated with the Cookie Theft picture description task and a comprehensive language assessment protocol. Patients also underwent ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging studies. Principal component analysis and machine learning were used to evaluate the main components of connected speech and the accuracy of connected speech parameters for diagnosing PPA. Voxel-based analyses were conducted to evaluate the correlation between spontaneous speech components and brain metabolism, brain volumes, and white matter microstructure.

RESULTS

Discrimination between patients with PPA and controls was 91.67%, with 77.78% discrimination between PPA variants. Parameters related to speech rate and lexical variables were the most discriminative for classification. Three main components were identified: lexical features, fluency, and syntax. The lexical component was associated with ventrolateral frontal regions, while the fluency component was associated with the medial superior prefrontal cortex. Number of pauses was more related with the left parietotemporal region, while pauses duration with the bilateral frontal lobe. The lexical component was correlated with several tracts in the language network (left frontal aslant tract, left superior longitudinal fasciculus I, II, and III, left arcuate fasciculus, and left uncinate fasciculus), and fluency was linked to the frontal aslant tract.

CONCLUSION

Spontaneous speech assessment is a useful, brief approach for the diagnosis of PPA and its variants. Neuroimaging correlates suggested a subspecialization within the left frontal lobe, with ventrolateral regions being more associated with lexical production and the medial superior prefrontal cortex with speech rate.

A Systematic Review of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Primary Progressive Aphasia: Methodological Considerations

A variety of tDCS approaches has been used to investigate the potential of tDCS to improve language outcomes, or slow down the decay of language competences caused by Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA). The employed stimulation protocols and study designs in PPA are generally speaking similar to those deployed in post-stroke aphasic populations. These two etiologies of aphasia however differ substantially in their pathophysiology, and for both conditions the optimal stimulation paradigm still needs to be established. A systematic review was done and after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 15 articles were analyzed focusing on differences and similarities across studies especially focusing on PPA patient characteristics (age, PPA variant, language background), tDCS stimulation protocols (intensity, frequency, combined therapy, electrode configuration) and study design as recent reviews and group outcomes for individual studies suggest tDCS is an effective tool to improve language outcomes, while methodological approach and patient characteristics are mentioned as moderators that may influence treatment effects. We found that studies of tDCS in PPA have clinical and methodological and heterogeneity regarding patient populations, stimulation protocols and study design. While positive group results are usually found irrespective of these differences, the magnitude, duration and generalization of these outcomes differ when comparing stimulation locations, and when results are stratified according to the clinical variant of PPA. We interpret the results of included studies in light of patient characteristics and methodological decisions. Further, we highlight the role neuroimaging can play in study protocols and interpreting results and make recommendations for future work.

Longitudinal Changes in Cognition, Behaviours, and Functional Abilities in the Three Main Variants of Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Literature Review

Primary progressive aphasias (PPAs) are a group of neurodegenerative diseases presenting with insidious and relentless language impairment. Three main PPA variants have been described: the non-fluent/agrammatic variant (nfvPPA), the semantic variant (svPPA), and the logopenic variant (lvPPA). At the time of diagnosis, patients and their families' main question pertains to prognosis and evolution, but very few data exist to support clinicians' claims. The objective of this study was to review the current literature on the longitudinal changes in cognition, behaviours, and functional abilities in the three main PPA variants. A comprehensive review was undertaken via a search on PUBMED and EMBASE. Two authors independently reviewed a total of 65 full-text records for eligibility. A total of 14 group studies and one meta-analysis were included. Among these, eight studies included all three PPA variants. Eight studies were prospective, and the follow-up duration was between one and five years. Overall, svPPA patients showed more behavioural disturbances both at baseline and over the course of the disease. Patients with lvPPA showed a worse cognitive decline, especially in episodic memory, and faster progression to dementia. Finally, patients with nfvPPA showed the most significant losses in language production and functional abilities. Data regarding the prodromal and last stages of PPA are still missing and studies with a longer follow-up observation period are needed.

Description of connected speech across different elicitation tasks in the logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia

BACKGROUND

Despite its importance, in-depth analysis of connected speech is often neglected in the diagnosis of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) - especially for the logopenic variant (lvPPA) for which unreliable differential diagnosis has been documented. Only a few studies have been conducted on this topic in lvPPA.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to describe and compare lexico-semantic and morphosyntactic features of connected speech in participants with lvPPA, in comparison with healthy controls, using three different elicitation tasks (i.e., picture description, story narration and semi-structured interviews). In addition to a number of discourse features, we were particularly interested in the presence or absence of syntactic deficits in this PPA variant in line with recent findings.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A prospective group study was conducted to compare lvPPA participants (n = 13) to age- and education-matched healthy controls (n = 13). For each individual, connected speech was obtained using three tasks: (1) The Cookie Theft picture description; (2) Cinderella Story; (3) Topic-directed interview. Production on each task was recorded, transcribed and analysed according to the Quantitative Production Analysis (QPA) protocol, a tool developed by Berndt et al. (2000) for the analysis of sentence production in aphasia. Differences between lvPPA and healthy controls and among elicitation tasks were analysed using repeated measures multilevel mixed-effects regression, separately for each outcome.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Four measures were significantly different between lvPPA participants and healthy controls across all elicitation tasks. Specifically, lvPPA participants produced a reduced proportion of open-class words, a higher proportion of verbs, a higher proportion of pronouns and fewer well-formed sentences. For these measures, the difference between lvPPA and healthy controls was consistent among elicitation tasks, except for the proportion of well-formed sentences, where the difference between the two groups was significantly greater in the story narration task than in the other tasks.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

Across elicitation tasks that used the same analysis protocol (i.e., QPA), a similar pattern of deficits in connected speech emerged in lvPPA patients. Importantly, the findings replicate previous studies, which used different elicitation tasks and analysis protocols. Especially in relation to the documented syntactic deficits, these findings provide implications for differential diagnosis in PPA.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Connected speech analysis can provide an important contribution to the language assessment for the logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA). However, only a few studies have been conducted with this population. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study highlights differences between patients with lvPPA and healthy controls regarding the proportion of open-class words, nouns, verbs and well-formed sentences. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Importantly, our results highlight syntactic deficits in the same group of individuals with lvPPA, using the same analysis protocol and across various elicitation tasks, which has implications for differential diagnosis.

Survival in the Three Common Variants of Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Retrospective Study in a Tertiary Memory Clinic

Knowledge on the natural history of the three main variants of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is lacking, particularly regarding mortality. Moreover, advanced stages and end of life issues are rarely discussed with caregivers and families at diagnosis, which can cause more psychological distress. We analyzed data from 83 deceased patients with a diagnosis of PPA. We studied survival in patients with a diagnosis of logopenic variant (lvPPA), semantic variant (svPPA), or non-fluent variant (nfvPPA) and examined causes of death. From medical records, we retrospectively collected data for each patient at several time points spanning five years before the first visit to death. When possible, interviews were performed with proxies of patients to complete missing data. Results showed that survival from symptom onset and diagnosis was significantly longer in svPPA than in lvPPA (p = 0.002) and nfvPPA (p < 0.001). No relevant confounders were associated with survival. Mean survival from symptom onset was 7.6 years for lvPPA, 7.1 years for nfvPPA, and 12 years for svPPA. The most common causes of death were natural cardio-pulmonary arrest and pneumonia. Aspiration pneumonia represented 23% of deaths in nfvPPA. In conclusion, this pilot study found significant differences in survival between the three variants of PPA with svPPA showing the longest and nfvPPA showing more neurologically-related causes of death.

The Electrophysiological Correlates of Phoneme Perception in Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Preliminary Case Series

Aims: This study aimed to investigate phoneme perception in patients with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) by using the event-related potential (ERP) technique. These ERP components might contribute to the diagnostic process of PPA and its clinical variants (NFV: nonfluent variant, SV: semantic variant, LV: logopenic variant) and reveal insights about phoneme perception processes in these patients.

Method: Phoneme discrimination and categorization processes were investigated by the mismatch negativity (MMN) and P300 in eight persons with early- and late-stage PPA (3 NFV, 2 LV, 2 SV, and 1 PPA-NOS; not otherwise specified) and 30 age-matched healthy adults. The mean amplitude, the onset latency, and the topographic distribution of both components in each patient were compared to the results of the control group.

Results: The MMN was absent or the onset latency of the MMN was delayed in the patients with the NFV, LV, and PPA-NOS in comparison to the control group. In contrast, no differences in mean amplitudes and onset latencies of the MMN were found between the patients with the SV and the control group. Concerning the P300, variable results were found in the patients with the NFV, SV, and PPA-NOS, but the P300 of both patients with the LV was delayed and prolonged with increased mean amplitude in comparison to the control group.

Conclusion: In this preliminary study, phoneme discrimination deficits were found in the patients with the NFV and LV, and variable deficits in phoneme categorization processes were found in all patients with PPA. In clinical practice, the MMN might be valuable to differentiate the SV from the NFV and the LV and the P300 to differentiate the LV from the NFV and the SV. Further research in larger and independent patient groups is required to investigate the applicability of these components in the diagnostic process and to determine the nature of these speech perception deficits in the clinical variants of PPA.

Neural regions underlying object and action naming: Complementary evidence from acute stroke and primary progressive aphasia

BACKGROUND

Naming impairment is commonly noted in individuals with aphasia. However, object naming receives more attention than action naming. Furthermore, most studies include participants with aphasia due to only one aetiology, commonly stroke. We developed a new assessment, the Hopkins Action Naming Assessment (HANA), to evaluate action naming impairments.

AIMS

Our aims were to show that the HANA is a useful tool that can (1) identify action naming impairments and (2) be used to investigate the neural substrates underlying naming. We paired the HANA with the Boston Naming Test (BNT) to compare action and object naming. We considered participants with aphasia due to primary progressive aphasia (PPA) or acute left hemisphere stroke to provide a more comprehensive picture of brain-behaviour relationships critical for naming. Behaviourally, we hypothesised that there would be a double dissociation between object and action naming performance. Neuroanatomically, we hypothesised that different neural substrates would be implicated in object vs. action naming and that different lesion-deficit associations would be identified in participants with PPA vs. acute stroke.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Participants (N=138 with PPA, N=37 with acute stroke) completed the BNT and HANA. Behavioural performance was compared. A subset of participants (N=31 with PPA, N=37 with acute stroke) provided neuroimaging data. The whole brain was automatically segmented into regions of interest (ROIs). For participants with PPA, the image variables were the ROI volumes, normalised by the brain volume. For participants with acute stroke, the image variables were the percentage of each ROI affected by the lesion. The relationship between ROIs likely to be involved in naming performance was modelled with LASSO regression.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Behavioural results showed a double dissociation in performance: in each group, some participants displayed intact performance relative to healthy controls on actions but not objects and/or significantly better performance on actions than objects, while others showed the opposite pattern. These results support the need to assess both objects and actions when evaluating naming deficits. Neuroimaging results identified different regions associated with object vs. action naming, implicating overlapping but distinct networks of regions. Furthermore, results differed for participants with PPA vs. acute stroke, indicating that critical information may be missed when only one aetiology is considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the study provides a more comprehensive picture of the neural bases of naming, underscoring the importance of assessing both objects and actions and considering different aetiologies of damage. It demonstrates the utility of the HANA.

Progressive apraxia of speech: delays to diagnosis and rates of alternative diagnoses

BACKGROUND

Progressive apraxia of speech (PAOS) is a neurodegenerative disorder of speech programming distinct from aphasia and dysarthria, most commonly associated with a 4-repeat tauopathy. Our objective was to better understand the reasons for possible delays or diagnostic errors for patients with PAOS.

METHODS

Seventy-seven consecutive PAOS research participants from the Neurodegenerative Research Group were included in this study. The medical records for these patients were reviewed in detail. For each speech-related visit, data such as the chief complaint, clinical findings, and neuroimaging findings were recorded.

RESULTS

Apraxia of speech was the initial diagnosis in 20.1% of participants at first evaluation noted in the historical record. Other common diagnoses included primary progressive aphasia (PPA) (20.1%), dysarthria (18.18%), MCI/Dementia (6.5%), and motor neuron disease (3.9%). It took a median of 2.02 (range: 0.16-8.18) years from symptoms onset for participants to receive an initial diagnosis and 3.00 (range: 0.49-9.42) years to receive a correct diagnosis. Those who were seen by a speech-language pathologist (SLP) during their first documented encounter were more likely to be correctly diagnosed with PAOS (37/48) after SLP consultation than those who were not seen by an SLP on initial encounter (5/29) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 80% of patients with PAOS were imprecisely diagnosed at their first visit, with it taking a median of 3 years from symptom onset to receiving a diagnosis of PAOS. Being seen by a speech-language pathologist during the initial evaluation increased the likelihood of a correct apraxia of speech diagnosis.

Speech and language therapy in primary progressive aphasia: a critical review of current practice

INTRODUCTION

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a complex language-led dementia syndrome whereby disproportionate deterioration of speech and language occurs subsequent to neurodegenerative disease in the early to mid-stages of the condition. As no effective pharmacotherapies are currently available, speech and language therapies are the optimum treatment to maximize communication for as long as possible.

AREAS COVERED

The authors present an overview of current speech-language therapy practices in PPA, highlighting recent research on effective treatments.

EXPERT OPINION

The challenges in this complex field of practice are described. We highlight the challenge of improving access to speech-language therapy by advocating for increased referral rates. The authors also suggest effective incorporation of innovative technologies in treatment and an enhanced evidence base for the utility of lexical retrieval treatment in improving everyday communication as challenges for the future. Finally, increased provision of PPA-specific education and support for individuals and their families is required.

Breakdowns in Informativeness of Naturalistic Speech Production in Primary Progressive Aphasia

“Functional communication” refers to an individual’s ability to communicate effectively in his or her everyday environment, and thus is a paramount skill to monitor and target therapeutically in people with aphasia. However, traditional controlled-paradigm assessments commonly used in both research and clinical settings often fail to adequately capture this ability. In the current study, facets of functional communication were measured from picture-elicited speech samples from 70 individuals with mild primary progressive aphasia (PPA), including the three variants, and 31 age-matched controls. Building upon methods recently used by Berube et al. (2019), we measured the informativeness of speech by quantifying the content of each patient’s description that was relevant to a picture relative to the total amount of speech they produced. Importantly, form-based errors, such as mispronunciations of words, unusual word choices, or grammatical mistakes are not penalized in this approach. We found that the relative informativeness, or efficiency, of speech was preserved in non-fluent variant PPA patients as compared with controls, whereas the logopenic and semantic variant PPA patients produced significantly less informative output. Furthermore, reduced informativeness in the semantic variant is attributable to a lower production of content units and a propensity for self-referential tangents, whereas for the logopenic variant, a lower production of content units and relatively ”empty” speech and false starts contribute to this reduction. These findings demonstrate that functional communication impairment does not uniformly affect all the PPA variants and highlight the utility of naturalistic speech analysis for measuring the breakdown of functional communication in PPA.

Language and Speech Markers of Primary Progressive Aphasia: A Systematic Review

Purpose This systematic review aimed to establish language and speech markers to support the clinical diagnosis of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) and its clinical phenotypes. Our first objective was to identify behavioral language and speech markers of early-stage PPA. Our second objective was to identify the electrophysiological correlates of the language and speech characteristics in PPA. Method The databases MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for relevant articles. To identify behavioral markers, the initial subjective complaints and the language and speech deficits detected during the initial diagnostic evaluation were summarized for PPA in general and each clinical variant according to the 2011 consensus diagnostic criteria (nonfluent variant [NFV], semantic variant, and logopenic variant [LV]). To identify electrophysiological markers, the studies in which event-related potentials (ERPs) were elicited by a language or speech paradigm in patients with PPA were included. Results In total, 114 relevant studies were identified, including 110 behavioral studies and only four electrophysiological studies. This review suggests that patients with the semantic variant could be accurately differentiated from the NFV and LV in the initial stages based on the consensus criteria. Nonetheless, the early differentiation between the NFV and LV is not straightforward. In the four electrophysiological studies, differences in the latency, amplitude, and topographical distribution of the semantic N400 component were found between patients with PPA and healthy controls. Conclusions To accurately differentiate the NFV from the LV, it could be important to assess the language and speech degeneration by more specific assessments and by more objective diagnostic methods that offer insights into the language-related processes. Electrophysiological markers of PPA were not identified in this review due to the low number of studies that investigated language-related ERPs. More controlled ERP studies in larger patient cohorts are needed to investigate the diagnostic applicability of language-related ERPs in PPA. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12798080.

Diagnostic Assessment in Primary Progressive Aphasia: An Illustrative Case Example

Purpose Diagnosis and classification of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) requires confirmation of specific speech and language symptoms, highlighting the important role of speech-language pathologists in the evaluation process. The purpose of this case report is to inform speech-language pathologists regarding current practices for diagnostic assessment in PPA, describing standard approaches as well as complementary, state-of-the-art procedures that may improve diagnostic precision. Method We describe the diagnostic evaluation of a 49-year-old woman with complaints of progressive word-finding difficulty. She completed standard neurological, neuropsychological, and speech-language evaluations, as well as magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography imaging of her brain. In addition, a history of developmental speech, language, and learning abilities was obtained, as well as genetic testing and assessment of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers. We discuss the evaluation results in the context of the most current research related to PPA diagnosis. Conclusion Detailed behavioral assessment, thorough intake of symptom history and neurodevelopmental differences, multimodal neuroimaging, and comprehensive examination of genes and biomarkers are of paramount importance for detecting and characterizing PPA, with ramifications for early behavioral and/or pharmacological intervention. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.12771113.

Classification of primary progressive aphasia: challenges and complexities

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is classified into three variants, logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA), nonfluent agrammatic PPA (nfaPPA), and semantic variant PPA (svPPA), based on clinical (syndromic) characteristics with support from neuroimaging and/or underlying neuropathology. Classification of PPA variants provides information valuable to disease management. International consensus criteria are widely employed to identify PPA subtypes; however, classification is complex, and some individuals do not fit neatly into the subtyping scheme. In this review, diagnostic challenges and their implications are discussed, possible explanations for these challenges are explored, and approaches to address PPA classification are considered.

Speech and language therapy for primary progressive aphasia across the UK: A survey of current practice

BACKGROUND

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) describes a heterogeneous group of language-led dementias. People with this type of dementia are increasingly being referred to speech and language therapy (SLT) services. Yet, there is a paucity of research evidence focusing on PPA interventions and little is known about SLT practice in terms of assessment and provision of intervention.

AIMS

To survey the practices of SLTs in the areas of assessment and intervention for people with PPA.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

A 37-item, pilot-tested survey was distributed electronically through the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT), Clinical Excellence Networks (CENs) and social media networks. Survey items included questions on care pathways, assessment and intervention approaches, and future planning. Analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

A total of 105 SLTs completed the survey. Respondents reported more frequently using formal assessment tools designed for stroke-related aphasia than for dementia. Informal interviews were reportedly always used during assessment by almost 80% of respondents. Respondents were significantly more likely to use communication partner training than impairment-focused interventions. Goal attainment was the most commonly used outcome measure. Respondents provided 88 goal examples, which fell into six themes: communication aid; conversation; functional communication; impairment focused; specific strategy; and communication partner. Additionally, respondents reported addressing areas such as future deterioration in communication and cognition, decision-making and mental capacity, and driving. Ten (9.4%) respondents reported the existence of a care pathway for people with PPA within their service.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

This survey highlights the range of current PPA assessment and intervention practices in use by the respondents. Communication partner training is commonly used by the surveyed SLTs, despite the lack of research evidence examining its effectiveness for PPA. There is a need to develop evidence-based care pathways for people with PPA in order to advocate for further commissioning of clinical services.