Sofia Cuoco1, Marina Picillo1, Immacolata Carotenuto1, Roberto Erro1, Eleonora Catricalà2, Stefano Cappa2,3, Maria Teresa Pellecchia4, Paolo Barone1. 1. Neuroscience Section, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (CEMAND), University of Salerno, 84131, Salerno, Italy. 2. University School for Advanced Studies IUSS Pavia, Pavia, Italy. 3. IRCCS Fondazione Mondino, Pavia, Italy. 4. Neuroscience Section, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (CEMAND), University of Salerno, 84131, Salerno, Italy. mpellecchia@unisa.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evidence about the language performance profile of multiple system atrophy (MSA) is limited, but its definition may lead to a more comprehensive characterization of the disorder and contribute to clarify the involvement of the basal ganglia in language abilities. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the study were: (1) to evaluate the reliability of the Screening for Aphasia in NeuroDegeneration (SAND) in MSA patients; (2) compare the linguistic profiles among MSA and Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and healthy controls (HC), and (3) assess relationships between language impairment and cognitive status and MSA motor subtypes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty patients with a diagnosis of MSA, 22 HC and 17 patients with PD were enrolled in the present study. By excluding the writing task that showed a poor acceptability, we showed that the MSA-tailored SAND Global Score is an acceptable, consistent and reliable tool to screen language disturbances in MSA. MSA patients performed worse than HC, but not than PD, in MSA-tailored SAND Global Score, repetition, reading and semantic association tasks. We did not find significant differences between MSA phenotypes. MSA patients with mild cognitive impairment-multiple domain presented worse language performances as compared to MSA patients with normal cognition and mild cognitive impairment-single domain. CONCLUSION: The MSA-tailored SAND Global Score is a consistent and reliable tool to screen language disturbances in MSA. Language disturbances characterize MSA patients irrespective of disease phenotype, and parallel the decline of global cognitive functions.
BACKGROUND: The evidence about the language performance profile of multiple system atrophy (MSA) is limited, but its definition may lead to a more comprehensive characterization of the disorder and contribute to clarify the involvement of the basal ganglia in language abilities. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the study were: (1) to evaluate the reliability of the Screening for Aphasia in NeuroDegeneration (SAND) in MSA patients; (2) compare the linguistic profiles among MSA and Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and healthy controls (HC), and (3) assess relationships between language impairment and cognitive status and MSA motor subtypes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty patients with a diagnosis of MSA, 22 HC and 17 patients with PD were enrolled in the present study. By excluding the writing task that showed a poor acceptability, we showed that the MSA-tailored SAND Global Score is an acceptable, consistent and reliable tool to screen language disturbances in MSA. MSA patients performed worse than HC, but not than PD, in MSA-tailored SAND Global Score, repetition, reading and semantic association tasks. We did not find significant differences between MSA phenotypes. MSA patients with mild cognitive impairment-multiple domain presented worse language performances as compared to MSA patients with normal cognition and mild cognitive impairment-single domain. CONCLUSION: The MSA-tailored SAND Global Score is a consistent and reliable tool to screen language disturbances in MSA. Language disturbances characterize MSA patients irrespective of disease phenotype, and parallel the decline of global cognitive functions.
Authors: Irene Litvan; Jennifer G Goldman; Alexander I Tröster; Ben A Schmand; Daniel Weintraub; Ronald C Petersen; Brit Mollenhauer; Charles H Adler; Karen Marder; Caroline H Williams-Gray; Dag Aarsland; Jaime Kulisevsky; Maria C Rodriguez-Oroz; David J Burn; Roger A Barker; Murat Emre Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2012-01-24 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Eleonora Catricalà; Veronica Boschi; Sofia Cuoco; Francesco Galiano; Marina Picillo; Elena Gobbi; Antonio Miozzo; Cristiano Chesi; Valentina Esposito; Gabriella Santangelo; Maria Teresa Pellecchia; Virginia M Borsa; Paolo Barone; Peter Garrard; Sandro Iannaccone; Stefano F Cappa Journal: Cortex Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 4.027
Authors: Juan Felipe Cardona; Oscar Gershanik; Carlos Gelormini-Lezama; Alexander Lee Houck; Sebastian Cardona; Lucila Kargieman; Natalia Trujillo; Analía Arévalo; Lucia Amoruso; Facundo Manes; Agustín Ibáñez Journal: Brain Struct Funct Date: 2013-02-15 Impact factor: 3.270
Authors: Aimee W Kao; Caroline A Racine; Lovingly C Quitania; Joel H Kramer; Chadwick W Christine; Bruce L Miller Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2009 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 2.703