OBJECTIVE: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is characterized by isolated decline in language functions. Semantic dementia and progressive nonfluent aphasia are accepted PPA variants. A "logopenic" variant (LPA) has also been proposed, but its cognitive and anatomic profile is less defined. The aim of this study was to establish the cognitive and anatomic features of LPA. METHODS: Six previously unreported LPA cases underwent extensive neuropsychological evaluation and an experimental study of phonological loop functions, including auditory and visual span tasks with digits, letters, and words. For each patient, a voxel-wise, automated analysis of MRI or SPECT data were conducted using SPM2. RESULTS: In LPA, speech rate was slow, with long word-finding pauses. Grammar and articulation were preserved, although phonological paraphasias could be present. Repetition and comprehension were impaired for sentences but preserved for single words, and naming was moderately affected. Investigation of phonological loop functions showed that patients were severely impaired in digit, letter, and word span tasks. Performance did not improve with pointing, was influenced by word length, and did not show the normal phonological similarity effect. Atrophy or decreased blood flow was consistently found in the posterior portion of the left superior and middle temporal gyri and inferior parietal lobule. CONCLUSIONS: Logopenic progressive aphasia (LPA) is a distinctive variant of primary progressive aphasia. Cognitive and neuroimaging data indicate that a deficit in phonological loop functions may be the core mechanism underlying the LPA clinical syndrome. Recent studies suggest that Alzheimer disease may be the most common pathology underlying the LPA clinical syndrome.
OBJECTIVE: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is characterized by isolated decline in language functions. Semantic dementia and progressive nonfluent aphasia are accepted PPA variants. A "logopenic" variant (LPA) has also been proposed, but its cognitive and anatomic profile is less defined. The aim of this study was to establish the cognitive and anatomic features of LPA. METHODS: Six previously unreported LPA cases underwent extensive neuropsychological evaluation and an experimental study of phonological loop functions, including auditory and visual span tasks with digits, letters, and words. For each patient, a voxel-wise, automated analysis of MRI or SPECT data were conducted using SPM2. RESULTS: In LPA, speech rate was slow, with long word-finding pauses. Grammar and articulation were preserved, although phonological paraphasias could be present. Repetition and comprehension were impaired for sentences but preserved for single words, and naming was moderately affected. Investigation of phonological loop functions showed that patients were severely impaired in digit, letter, and word span tasks. Performance did not improve with pointing, was influenced by word length, and did not show the normal phonological similarity effect. Atrophy or decreased blood flow was consistently found in the posterior portion of the left superior and middle temporal gyri and inferior parietal lobule. CONCLUSIONS:Logopenic progressive aphasia (LPA) is a distinctive variant of primary progressive aphasia. Cognitive and neuroimaging data indicate that a deficit in phonological loop functions may be the core mechanism underlying the LPA clinical syndrome. Recent studies suggest that Alzheimer disease may be the most common pathology underlying the LPA clinical syndrome.
Authors: B Borroni; D Anchisi; B Paghera; B Vicini; N Kerrouche; V Garibotto; A Terzi; L A Vignolo; M Di Luca; R Giubbini; A Padovani; D Perani Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2005-03-24 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: K A Josephs; J L Whitwell; J R Duffy; W A Vanvoorst; E A Strand; W T Hu; B F Boeve; N R Graff-Radford; J E Parisi; D S Knopman; D W Dickson; C R Jack; R C Petersen Journal: Neurology Date: 2008-01-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Maria Luisa Gorno-Tempini; Nina F Dronkers; Katherine P Rankin; Jennifer M Ogar; La Phengrasamy; Howard J Rosen; Julene K Johnson; Michael W Weiner; Bruce L Miller Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: M Signorini; E Paulesu; K Friston; D Perani; A Colleluori; G Lucignani; F Grassi; V Bettinardi; R S Frackowiak; F Fazio Journal: Neuroimage Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: M Grossman; J Mickanin; K Onishi; E Hughes; M D'Esposito; X S Ding; A Alavi; M Reivich Journal: J Cogn Neurosci Date: 1996 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Catriona D Good; Rachael I Scahill; Nick C Fox; John Ashburner; Karl J Friston; Dennis Chan; William R Crum; Martin N Rossor; Richard S J Frackowiak Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Benno Gesierich; Jorge Jovicich; Marianna Riello; Michela Adriani; Alessia Monti; Valentina Brentari; Simon D Robinson; Stephen M Wilson; Scott L Fairhall; Maria Luisa Gorno-Tempini Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: D Sapolsky; A Bakkour; A Negreira; P Nalipinski; S Weintraub; M-M Mesulam; D Caplan; B C Dickerson Journal: Neurology Date: 2010-07-27 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Maya L Henry; Stephen M Wilson; Miranda C Babiak; Maria Luisa Mandelli; Pelagie M Beeson; Zachary A Miller; Maria Luisa Gorno-Tempini Journal: J Cogn Neurosci Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Sladjana Lukic; Maria Luisa Mandelli; Ariane Welch; Kesshi Jordan; Wendy Shwe; John Neuhaus; Zachary Miller; H Isabel Hubbard; Maya Henry; Bruce L Miller; Nina F Dronkers; Maria Luisa Gorno-Tempini Journal: Brain Lang Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 2.381
Authors: Felix Gervits; Sharon Ash; H Branch Coslett; Katya Rascovsky; Murray Grossman; Roy Hamilton Journal: Brain Lang Date: 2016-08-12 Impact factor: 2.381