| Literature DB >> 24849862 |
Bruno Dubois1, Howard H Feldman2, Claudia Jacova3, Harald Hampel4, José Luis Molinuevo5, Kaj Blennow6, Steven T DeKosky7, Serge Gauthier8, Dennis Selkoe9, Randall Bateman10, Stefano Cappa11, Sebastian Crutch12, Sebastiaan Engelborghs13, Giovanni B Frisoni14, Nick C Fox15, Douglas Galasko16, Marie-Odile Habert17, Gregory A Jicha18, Agneta Nordberg19, Florence Pasquier20, Gil Rabinovici21, Philippe Robert22, Christopher Rowe23, Stephen Salloway24, Marie Sarazin25, Stéphane Epelbaum4, Leonardo C de Souza26, Bruno Vellas27, Pieter J Visser28, Lon Schneider29, Yaakov Stern30, Philip Scheltens31, Jeffrey L Cummings32.
Abstract
In the past 8 years, both the International Working Group (IWG) and the US National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association have contributed criteria for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) that better define clinical phenotypes and integrate biomarkers into the diagnostic process, covering the full staging of the disease. This Position Paper considers the strengths and limitations of the IWG research diagnostic criteria and proposes advances to improve the diagnostic framework. On the basis of these refinements, the diagnosis of AD can be simplified, requiring the presence of an appropriate clinical AD phenotype (typical or atypical) and a pathophysiological biomarker consistent with the presence of Alzheimer's pathology. We propose that downstream topographical biomarkers of the disease, such as volumetric MRI and fluorodeoxyglucose PET, might better serve in the measurement and monitoring of the course of disease. This paper also elaborates on the specific diagnostic criteria for atypical forms of AD, for mixed AD, and for the preclinical states of AD.Entities:
Mesh：
Substances：
Year: 2014 PMID： 24849862 DOI： 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70090-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Lancet Neurol ISSN： 1474-4422 Impact factor: 44.182