Rapidly Progressive Dementia in the Outpatient Clinic: More Than Prions

15 Years of Longitudinal Genetic, Clinical, Cognitive, Imaging, and Biochemical Measures in DIAN

This manuscript describes and summarizes the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network Observational Study (DIAN Obs), highlighting the wealth of longitudinal data, samples, and results from this human cohort study of brain aging and a rare monogenic form of Alzheimer's disease (AD). DIAN Obs is an international collaborative longitudinal study initiated in 2008 with support from the National Institute on Aging (NIA), designed to obtain comprehensive and uniform data on brain biology and function in individuals at risk for autosomal dominant AD (ADAD). ADAD gene mutations in the amyloid protein precursor (APP), presenilin 1 (PSEN1), or presenilin 2 (PSEN2) genes are deterministic causes of ADAD, with virtually full penetrance, and a predictable age at symptomatic onset. Data and specimens collected are derived from full clinical assessments, including neurologic and physical examinations, extensive cognitive batteries, structural and functional neuro-imaging, amyloid and tau pathological measures using positron emission tomography (PET), flurordeoxyglucose (FDG) PET, cerebrospinal fluid and blood collection (plasma, serum, and whole blood), extensive genetic and multi-omic analyses, and brain donation upon death. This comprehensive evaluation of the human nervous system is performed longitudinally in both mutation carriers and family non-carriers, providing one of the deepest and broadest evaluations of the human brain across decades and through AD progression. These extensive data sets and samples are available for researchers to address scientific questions on the human brain, aging, and AD.

Diagnostic Utility of Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers in Patients with Rapidly Progressive Dementia

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to apply established and emerging cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers to improve diagnostic accuracy in patients with rapidly progressive dementia (RPD). Overlap in clinical presentation and results of diagnostic tests confounds etiologic diagnosis in patients with RPD. Objective measures are needed to improve diagnostic accuracy and to recognize patients with potentially treatment-responsive causes of RPD.

METHODS

Biomarkers of Alzheimer disease neuropathology (amyloid-β 42/40 ratio, phosphorylated tau [p-tau181, p-tau231]), neuroaxonal/neuronal injury (neurofilament light chain [NfL], visinin-like protein-1 [VILIP-1], total tau), neuroinflammation (chitinase-3-like protein [YKL-40], soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 [sTREM2], glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP], monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 [MCP-1]), and synaptic dysfunction (synaptosomal-associated protein 25kDa, neurogranin) were measured in CSF obtained at presentation from 78 prospectively accrued patients with RPD due to neurodegenerative, vascular, and autoimmune/inflammatory diseases; 35 age- and sex-matched patients with typically progressive neurodegenerative disease; and 72 cognitively normal controls. Biomarker levels were compared across etiologic diagnoses, by potential treatment responsiveness, and between patients with typical and rapidly progressive presentations of neurodegenerative disease.

RESULTS

Alzheimer disease biomarkers were associated with neurodegenerative causes of RPD. High NfL, sTREM2, and YKL-40 and low VILIP-1 identified patients with autoimmune/inflammatory diseases. MCP-1 levels were highest in patients with vascular causes of RPD. A multivariate model including GFAP, MCP-1, p-tau181, and sTREM2 identified the 44 patients with treatment-responsive causes of RPD with 89% accuracy. Minimal differences were observed between typical and rapidly progressive presentations of neurodegenerative disease.

INTERPRETATION

Selected CSF biomarkers at presentation were associated with etiologic diagnoses and treatment responsiveness in patients with heterogeneous causes of RPD. The ability of cross-sectional biomarkers to inform upon mechanisms that drive rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disease is less clear. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:299-313.

Improving Early Recognition of Treatment-Responsive Causes of Rapidly Progressive Dementia: The STAM3 P Score

OBJECTIVE

To improve the timely recognition of patients with treatment-responsive causes of rapidly progressive dementia (RPD).

METHODS

A total of 226 adult patients with suspected RPD were enrolled in a prospective observational study and followed for up to 2 years. Diseases associated with RPD were characterized as potentially treatment-responsive or non-responsive, referencing clinical literature. Disease progression was measured using Clinical Dementia Rating® Sum-of-Box scores. Clinical and paraclinical features associated with treatment responsiveness were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Findings informed the development of a clinical criterion optimized to recognize patients with potentially treatment-responsive causes of RPD early in the diagnostic evaluation.

RESULTS

A total of 155 patients met defined RPD criteria, of whom 86 patients (55.5%) had potentially treatment-responsive causes. The median (range) age-at-symptom onset in patients with RPD was 68.9 years (range 22.0-90.7 years), with a similar number of men and women. Seizures, tumor (disease-associated), magnetic resonance imaging suggestive of autoimmune encephalitis, mania, movement abnormalities, and pleocytosis (≥10 cells/mm3 ) in cerebrospinal fluid at presentation were independently associated with treatment-responsive causes of RPD after controlling for age and sex. Those features at presentation, as well as age-at-symptom onset <50 years (ie, STAM3 P), captured 82 of 86 (95.3%) cases of treatment-responsive RPD. The presence of ≥3 STAM3 P features had a positive predictive value of 100%.

INTERPRETATION

Selected features at presentation reliably identified patients with potentially treatment-responsive causes of RPD. Adaptation of the STAM3 P screening score in clinical practice may minimize diagnostic delays and missed opportunities for treatment in patients with suspected RPD. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:237-248.

[Features of the clinical and neuroimaging picture in patients with early-onset Alzheimer's disease]

The most common cause of severe cognitive impairment in adults is Alzheimer's disease (AD). Depending on the age of onset, AD is divided into early (<65 years) and late (≥65 years) forms. Early-onset AD (EOAD) is significantly less common than later-onset AD (LOAD) and accounts for only about 5-10% of cases. However, its medical and social significance, as a disease leading to loss of ability to work and legal capacity, as well as premature death in patients aged 40-64 years, is extremely high. Patients with EOAD compared with LOAD have a greater number of atypical clinical variants - 25% and 6-12.5%, respectively, which complicates the differential diagnosis of EOAD with other neurodegenerative diseases. However, the typical classical amnestic variant predominates in both EOAD and LOAD. Also, patients with EOAD have peculiarities according to neuroimaging data: when performing MRI of the brain, patients with EOAD often have more pronounced parietal atrophy and less pronounced hippocampal atrophy compared to patients with LOAD. The article pays attention to the features of the clinical and neuroimaging data in patients with EOAD; a case of a patient with EOAD is presented.

Prevalence and outcomes of rapidly progressive dementia: a retrospective cohort study in a neurologic unit in China

BACKGROUND

Rapidly progressive dementia (RPD) is a syndrome originating from various diseases. Recent advances have allowed a better understanding of its categories and spectrum; however, it remains challenging to make an accurate differential diagnosis and prognosis prediction.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective evaluation of all participants admitted to the neurology department of a single center in China from January 2015 to December 2019. The screened patients met the RPD criteria and their characteristics were collected to explore a diagnostic pattern of RPD. In addition, outcomes of RPD were evaluated with the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), activities of daily living scale (ADL), and simplified Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and different prognostic analysis methods were performed to determine the prognostic factors of RPD.

RESULTS

A total of 149 RPD patients among 15,731 inpatients were identified with an average MMSE value of 13.0 ± 4.6 at baseline. Etiological epidemiology revealed infectious, neurodegenerative and toxic/metabolic diseases as the three largest groups, accounting for 26.2%, 20.8% and 16.8% of all cases, respectively. In particular, prevalence rates of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (13.4%), Alzheimer's disease (11.4%), carbon monoxide poisoning (8.1%), neurosyphilis (5.4%) and dementia with Lewy bodies (5.4%) were highest in this series. A recommended diagnostic framework for RPD etiology was thus established. Follow-up evaluations showed a negative correlation between age and GOS scores (r=-0.421, P < 0.001), as well as age and simplified MMSE scores (r_s =- 0.393, P < 0.001), and a positive correlation between age and ADL scores (r_s =0.503, P < 0.001), and significantly different GOS, ADL and simplified MMSE scores across various etiologies (P = 0.003; F = 9.463, P < 0.001; F = 6.117, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Infectious, neurodegenerative and toxic-metabolic entities were the most common RPD categories, and establishing a practical approach to RPD etiology would allow better disease management.

Alzheimer's disease cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers differentiate patients with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and autoimmune encephalitis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) is a potentially treatable cause of rapidly progressive dementia that may mimic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). Alzheimer disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers may discriminate CJD from AD, but utility in discriminating CJD and AE is unclear. This study compared AD CSF biomarkers in CJD and AE.

METHODS

Patients with probable or definite CJD and probable or definite AE who underwent Roche Elecsys AD CSF biomarker testing at Mayo Clinic from March 2020 through April 2021 were included. Total-tau, phosphorylated181 tau and amyloid-β42 levels were compared.

RESULTS

Of 11 CJD cases, four were autopsy proven; the rest had positive real-time quaking-induced conversion testing. Disease-associated autoantibodies were detected in 8/15 cases of AE: leucine-rich glioma-inactivated 1 and neuronal intermediate filaments (two cases each), and N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor, contactin-associated protein-like 2, dipeptidyl-peptidase-like protein 6 and immunoglobulin-like cell adhesion molecule IgLON family member 5. Total-tau provided excellent discrimination between CJD and AE in a univariate model (odds ratio 1.46 per 100 pg/ml, 95% confidence interval 1.17-2.11, p < 0.05, c = 0.93). Total-tau was elevated in 91% of CJD cases (median > 1300, range 236->1300 pg/ml), of which 55% were above the limit of assay measurement (>1300 pg/ml). Total-tau was elevated in 20% of AE cases (median 158, range 80->1300 pg/ml).

CONCLUSION

Total-tau was greater in CJD than AE. Given that amyloid-β42 and phosphorylated181 tau were comparable, the ratio differences were probably driven by elevated total-tau in CJD. This study supports the role for AD biomarker testing in patients with rapidly progressive dementia.

Rapidly Progressive Dementia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article presents a practical approach to the evaluation of patients with rapidly progressive dementia.

RECENT FINDINGS

The approach presented in this article builds upon the standard dementia evaluation, leveraging widely available tests and emergent specific markers of disease to narrow the differential diagnosis and determine the cause(s) of rapid progressive decline. The discovery of treatment-responsive causes of rapidly progressive dementia underscores the need to determine the cause early in the symptomatic course when treatments are most likely to halt or reverse cognitive decline.

SUMMARY

A pragmatic and organized approach to patients with rapidly progressive dementia is essential to mitigate diagnostic and therapeutic challenges and optimize patient outcomes.

Rapidly progressive dementias - aetiologies, diagnosis and management

Rapidly progressive dementias (RPDs) are a group of heterogeneous disorders that include immune-mediated, infectious and metabolic encephalopathies, as well as prion diseases and atypically rapid presentations of more common neurodegenerative diseases. Some of these conditions are treatable, and some must be diagnosed promptly because of their potential infectivity. Prion disease is considered to be the prototypical RPD, but over the past two decades, epidemiological reports and the identification of various encephalitis-mediating antibodies have led to a growing recognition of other encephalopathies as potential causes of rapid cognitive decline. Knowledge of RPD aetiologies, syndromes and diagnostic work-up protocols will help clinicians to establish an early, accurate diagnosis, thereby reducing morbidity and mortality, especially in immune-mediated and other potentially reversible dementias. In this Review, we define the syndrome of RPD and shed light on its different aetiologies and on secondary factors that might contribute to rapid cognitive decline. We describe an extended diagnostic procedure in the context of important differential diagnoses, discuss the utility of biomarkers and summarize potential treatment options. In addition, we discuss treatment options such as high-dose steroid therapy in the context of therapy and diagnosis in clinically ambiguous cases.

The term ‘rapidly progressive dementia’ (RPD) describes a cognitive disorder with fast progression, leading to dementia within a relatively short time. This Review discusses the wide range of RPD aetiologies, as well as the diagnostic approach and treatment options.

Definitions of rapidly progressive dementia (RPD) vary according to the aetiological background and relate to the speed of cognitive decline, time from first symptom to dementia syndrome and/or overall survival.

RPD can occur in rapidly progressive neurodegenerative diseases, such as prion diseases, or in primarily slowly progressive diseases as a consequence of intrinsic factors or concomitant pathologies.

Besides neurodegenerative diseases, inflammatory (immune-mediated and infectious), vascular, metabolic and neoplastic CNS diseases are important and frequent causes of RPD.

To identify treatable causes of RPD, the technical diagnostic work-up must include MRI and analyses of blood and cerebrospinal fluid, and further diagnostics might be indicated in unclear cases.

Therapeutic options for many non-neurodegenerative causes of RPD are already available; disease-modifying therapies for neurodegenerative RPDs are an important focus of current research and could become a treatment option in the near future.

A Neurologist's Practical Approach to Cognitive Impairment

The global prevalence of dementia is expected to triple by the year 2050. This impending health care crisis has led to new heights of public awareness and general concern regarding cognitive impairment. Subsequently, clinicians are seeing more and more people presenting with cognitive concerns. It is important that clinicians meet these concerns with a strategy promoting accurate diagnoses. We have diagramed and described a practical approach to cognitive impairment. Through an algorithmic approach, we determine the presence and severity of cognitive impairment, systematically evaluate domains of function, and use this information to determine the next steps in evaluation. We also discuss how to proceed when cognitive impairment is associated with motor abnormalities or rapid progression.

Evolving Causes of Rapidly Progressive Dementia: A 5-Year Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Rapidly progressive dementia (RPD) is a clinical syndrome developing in <1 to 2 years. Recent progress in RPD evaluation is significant, so RPD's prevalence may change over time. The aim of our new case series was to estimate the relative frequency of RPDs' causative entities, considering the recent advances in RPDs' diagnosis, and compare the results with those of our previous report.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 47 patients who were referred to Attikon University Hospital during a 5-year period for a suspected RPD.

RESULTS

Neurodegenerative diseases were the most frequent causes (38%), followed by prion disease (19%) and autoimmune encephalopathy (AE, 17%). AE cases were by far more common than in our previous report, while other than AE secondary causes were significantly decreased. Mean time to dementia was 9 months in neurodegenerative diseases and 5 months in non-neurodegenerative. Main clinical findings across all patients were memory impairment (66%) and behavioral-emotional disturbances (48%).

CONCLUSIONS

Neurodegenerative diseases are common causes of RPD and have a slower evolution than non-neurodegenerative. Diagnostic novelties enabled the recognition of AE, whereas more common secondary causes are probably now diagnosed in primary settings since the recognition of RPD as distinct clinical entity is continually increasing.

Diagnosis of Rapidly Progressive Dementia in a Referral Center in Argentina

INTRODUCTION

Rapidly progressive dementia (RPD) is a broadly defined clinical syndrome. Our aim was to describe clinical and ancillary study findings in patients with RPD and evaluate their diagnostic performance for the identification of nonchronic neurodegenerative rapidly progressive dementia (ncnRPD).

METHODS

We reviewed clinical records and ancillary methods of patients evaluated for RPD at our institution in Buenos Aires, Argentina from 2011 to 2017. We compared findings between chronic neurodegenerative RPD and ncnRPD and evaluated the diagnostic metrics using receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

We included 104 patients with RPD, 29 of whom were chronic neurodegenerative RPD and 75 of whom were ncnRPD. The 6-month time to dementia cutpoint had a sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 100% for ncnRPD, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.965 (95% confidence interval=0.935-0.99; P<0.001). A decision tree that included time to dementia, brain magnetic resonance imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid analysis identified ncnRPD patients with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 79%, positive predictive value of 93%, and negative predictive value of 100% overall.

DISCUSSION

RPD is a clinical syndrome that comprises different diagnoses, many of them for treatable diseases. Using the time to dementia, brain magnetic resonance imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid analysis when triaging these patients could help identify those diseases that need to be studied more aggressively.