Melissa J Armstrong1, David J Irwin2, James B Leverenz3, Noheli Gamez1, Angela Taylor4, James E Galvin5. 1. Department of Neurology, University of Florida College of Medicine, McKnight Brain Institute, Gainesville. 2. Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Cleveland Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health - Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. 4. Lewy Body Dementia Association, Lilburn, GA. 5. Department of Neurology, Comprehensive Center for Brain Health, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dementia with Lewy body (DLB) diagnostic criteria define "indicative" and "supportive" biomarkers, but clinical practice patterns are unknown. METHODS: An anonymous survey querying clinical use of diagnostic tests/biomarkers was sent to 38 center of excellence investigators. The survey included "indicative" biomarkers (dopamine transporter scan, myocardial scintigraphy, polysomnography), "supportive" biomarkers [magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)], positron emission tomography, or single-photon emission computed tomography perfusion/metabolism scans, quantitative electroencephalography), and other diagnostic tests (neuropsychological testing, cerebrospinal fluid analysis, genetics). Responses were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Of the 22 respondents (58%), all reported the capability to perform neuropsychological testing, MRI, polysomnography, dopamine transporter scans, positron emission tomography/single-photon emission computed tomography scans, and cerebrospinal fluid analysis; 96% could order genetic testing. Neuropsychological testing and MRI were the most commonly ordered tests. Diagnostic testing beyond MRI and neuropsychological testing was most helpful in the context of "possible" DLB and mild cognitive impairment and to assist with differential diagnosis. Myocardial scintigraphy and electroencephalograpy use were rare. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Neuropsychological testing and MRI remain the most widely used diagnostic tests by DLB specialists. Other tests-particularly indicative biomarkers-are used only selectively. Research is needed to validate existing potential DLB biomarkers, develop new biomarkers, and investigate mechanisms to improve DLB diagnosis.
BACKGROUND: Dementia with Lewy body (DLB) diagnostic criteria define "indicative" and "supportive" biomarkers, but clinical practice patterns are unknown. METHODS: An anonymous survey querying clinical use of diagnostic tests/biomarkers was sent to 38 center of excellence investigators. The survey included "indicative" biomarkers (dopamine transporter scan, myocardial scintigraphy, polysomnography), "supportive" biomarkers [magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)], positron emission tomography, or single-photon emission computed tomography perfusion/metabolism scans, quantitative electroencephalography), and other diagnostic tests (neuropsychological testing, cerebrospinal fluid analysis, genetics). Responses were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Of the 22 respondents (58%), all reported the capability to perform neuropsychological testing, MRI, polysomnography, dopamine transporter scans, positron emission tomography/single-photon emission computed tomography scans, and cerebrospinal fluid analysis; 96% could order genetic testing. Neuropsychological testing and MRI were the most commonly ordered tests. Diagnostic testing beyond MRI and neuropsychological testing was most helpful in the context of "possible" DLB and mild cognitive impairment and to assist with differential diagnosis. Myocardial scintigraphy and electroencephalograpy use were rare. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Neuropsychological testing and MRI remain the most widely used diagnostic tests by DLB specialists. Other tests-particularly indicative biomarkers-are used only selectively. Research is needed to validate existing potential DLB biomarkers, develop new biomarkers, and investigate mechanisms to improve DLB diagnosis.
Authors: Tresa M Roebuck-Spencer; Tannahill Glen; Antonio E Puente; Robert L Denney; Ronald M Ruff; Gayle Hostetter; Kevin J Bianchini Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: Susan K Schultz; Maria D Llorente; Amy E Sanders; Waimei A Tai; Amy Bennett; Samantha Shugarman; Robert Roca Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Laura Bonanni; Raffaella Franciotti; Flavio Nobili; Milica G Kramberger; John-Paul Taylor; Sara Garcia-Ptacek; N Walter Falasca; Francesco Famá; Ruth Cromarty; Marco Onofrj; Dag Aarsland Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Seok Jong Chung; Yang Hyun Lee; Han Soo Yoo; Young H Sohn; Byoung Seok Ye; Jungho Cha; Phil Hyu Lee Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-04-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: T J Ferman; B F Boeve; G E Smith; S-C Lin; M H Silber; O Pedraza; Z Wszolek; N R Graff-Radford; R Uitti; J Van Gerpen; W Pao; D Knopman; V S Pankratz; K Kantarci; B Boot; J E Parisi; B N Dugger; H Fujishiro; R C Petersen; D W Dickson Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-08-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Laura Bonanni; Astrid Thomas; Pietro Tiraboschi; Bernardo Perfetti; Sara Varanese; Marco Onofrj Journal: Brain Date: 2008-01-17 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Clifford R Jack; David A Bennett; Kaj Blennow; Maria C Carrillo; Billy Dunn; Samantha Budd Haeberlein; David M Holtzman; William Jagust; Frank Jessen; Jason Karlawish; Enchi Liu; Jose Luis Molinuevo; Thomas Montine; Creighton Phelps; Katherine P Rankin; Christopher C Rowe; Philip Scheltens; Eric Siemers; Heather M Snyder; Reisa Sperling Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Lorna Harper; Frederik Barkhof; Philip Scheltens; Jonathan M Schott; Nick C Fox Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2013-10-16 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Alan J Thomas; John Paul Taylor; Ian McKeith; Claire Bamford; David Burn; Louise Allan; John O'Brien Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2016-12-08 Impact factor: 3.485