OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic value of CSF biomarkers in patients with known pathology due to frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). BACKGROUND: It is important to distinguish FTLD from other neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer disease (AD), but this may be difficult clinically because of atypical presentations. METHODS: Patients with FTLD (n = 30) and AD (n = 19) were identified at autopsy or on the basis of genetic testing at University of Pennsylvania and Erasmus University Medical Center. CSF was obtained during a diagnostic lumbar puncture and was analyzed using assays for total tau and amyloid-beta 1-42 (A beta(42)). Patients also were assessed with a brief neuropsychological battery. RESULTS: CSF total tau level and the ratio of CSF total tau to A beta(42) (tau/A beta(42)) were significantly lower in FTLD than in AD. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses confirmed that the CSF tau/A beta(42) ratio is sensitive and specific at discriminating between FTLD and AD, and is more successful at this than CSF total tau alone. Although some neuropsychological measures are significantly different in autopsy-proven FTLD and AD, combining these neuropsychological measures with CSF biomarkers did not improve the ability to distinguish FTLD from AD. CONCLUSIONS: The ratio of CSF tau/A beta(42) is a sensitive and specific biomarker at discriminating frontotemporal lobar degeneration from Alzheimer disease in patients with known pathology.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic value of CSF biomarkers in patients with known pathology due to frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). BACKGROUND: It is important to distinguish FTLD from other neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer disease (AD), but this may be difficult clinically because of atypical presentations. METHODS:Patients with FTLD (n = 30) and AD (n = 19) were identified at autopsy or on the basis of genetic testing at University of Pennsylvania and Erasmus University Medical Center. CSF was obtained during a diagnostic lumbar puncture and was analyzed using assays for total tau and amyloid-beta 1-42 (A beta(42)). Patients also were assessed with a brief neuropsychological battery. RESULTS:CSF total tau level and the ratio of CSF total tau to A beta(42) (tau/A beta(42)) were significantly lower in FTLD than in AD. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses confirmed that the CSFtau/A beta(42) ratio is sensitive and specific at discriminating between FTLD and AD, and is more successful at this than CSF total tau alone. Although some neuropsychological measures are significantly different in autopsy-proven FTLD and AD, combining these neuropsychological measures with CSF biomarkers did not improve the ability to distinguish FTLD from AD. CONCLUSIONS: The ratio of CSFtau/A beta(42) is a sensitive and specific biomarker at discriminating frontotemporal lobar degeneration from Alzheimer disease in patients with known pathology.
Authors: N Andreasen; C Hesse; P Davidsson; L Minthon; A Wallin; B Winblad; H Vanderstichele; E Vanmechelen; K Blennow Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 1999-06
Authors: H J Rosen; M L Gorno-Tempini; W P Goldman; R J Perry; N Schuff; M Weiner; R Feiwell; J H Kramer; B L Miller Journal: Neurology Date: 2002-01-22 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: David S Knopman; Bradley F Boeve; Joseph E Parisi; Dennis W Dickson; Glenn E Smith; Robert J Ivnik; Keith A Josephs; Ronald C Petersen Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Andrew Graham; Rhys Davies; John Xuereb; Glenda Halliday; Jillian Kril; Helen Creasey; Kim Graham; John Hodges Journal: Brain Date: 2005-01-05 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Mark S Forman; Jennifer Farmer; Julene K Johnson; Christopher M Clark; Steven E Arnold; H Branch Coslett; Anjan Chatterjee; Howard I Hurtig; Jason H Karlawish; Howard J Rosen; Vivianna Van Deerlin; Virginia M-Y Lee; Bruce L Miller; John Q Trojanowski; Murray Grossman Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Murray Grossman; David J Libon; Mark S Forman; Lauren Massimo; Elisabeth Wood; Peachie Moore; Chivon Anderson; Jennifer Farmer; Anjan Chatterjee; Christopher M Clark; H Branch Coslett; Howard I Hurtig; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2007-11
Authors: P Mecocci; A Cherubini; M Bregnocchi; F Chionne; R Cecchetti; D T Lowenthal; U Senin Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: David A Wolk; Julie C Price; Charles Madeira; Judy A Saxton; Beth E Snitz; Oscar L Lopez; Chester A Mathis; William E Klunk; Steven T DeKosky Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2012-01-30 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: C T McMillan; C Brun; S Siddiqui; M Churgin; D Libon; P Yushkevich; H Zhang; A Boller; J Gee; M Grossman Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-05-16 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Alberto Lleó; David J Irwin; Ignacio Illán-Gala; Corey T McMillan; David A Wolk; Edward B Lee; Vivianna M Van Deerlin; Leslie M Shaw; John Q Trojanowski; Murray Grossman Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Leslie M Shaw; Hugo Vanderstichele; Malgorzata Knapik-Czajka; Christopher M Clark; Paul S Aisen; Ronald C Petersen; Kaj Blennow; Holly Soares; Adam Simon; Piotr Lewczuk; Robert Dean; Eric Siemers; William Potter; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Clifford R Jack; David S Knopman; William J Jagust; Leslie M Shaw; Paul S Aisen; Michael W Weiner; Ronald C Petersen; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 44.182