Abstract
Background
Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease (fvAD) is considered a rare form of Alzheimer's disease (AD) which may be misdiagnosed as behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). The literature has tended to conflate behavioural and executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts and uses both AD diagnostic criteria and bvFTD diagnostic criteria to classify fvAD cohorts. The primary aim of this narrative synthesis was to summarise neuropsychological findings in fvAD cohorts in the context of established AD pathology.
Methods
EMBASE, PsycINFO, PROQUEST and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies eligible for inclusion. Studies with both neuropsychological and biomarker evidence were included in the final narrative synthesis.
Results
Ten studies were reviewed, including samples totalling 342 fvAD participants, 178 typical AD participants and 250 bvFTD participants. The review revealed areas worthy of further investigation that may aid differential diagnosis, including the degree of executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts relative to bvFTD cohorts, the onset of behavioural and cognitive symptomatology, and similarities between fvAD and typical AD cognitive profiles.
Conclusion
There was insufficient neuropsychological evidence to clearly differentiate fvAD and bvFTD cognitive phenotypes, however, the review has highlighted distinctive features of the two disorders that may guide differential diagnosis in future research. Moreover, the review has highlighted issues involving disparate diagnostic criteria used to classify fvAD cohorts, contributing to variation in findings.
Frontal variant Alzheimer's disease (fvAD) is considered a rare form of Alzheimer's disease (AD) which may be misdiagnosed as behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). The literature has tended to conflate behavioural and executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts and uses both AD diagnostic criteria and bvFTD diagnostic criteria to classify fvAD cohorts. The primary aim of this narrative synthesis was to summarise neuropsychological findings in fvAD cohorts in the context of established AD pathology.
Methods
EMBASE, PsycINFO, PROQUEST and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies eligible for inclusion. Studies with both neuropsychological and biomarker evidence were included in the final narrative synthesis.
Results
Ten studies were reviewed, including samples totalling 342 fvAD participants, 178 typical AD participants and 250 bvFTD participants. The review revealed areas worthy of further investigation that may aid differential diagnosis, including the degree of executive dysfunction in fvAD cohorts relative to bvFTD cohorts, the onset of behavioural and cognitive symptomatology, and similarities between fvAD and typical AD cognitive profiles.
Conclusion
There was insufficient neuropsychological evidence to clearly differentiate fvAD and bvFTD cognitive phenotypes, however, the review has highlighted distinctive features of the two disorders that may guide differential diagnosis in future research. Moreover, the review has highlighted issues involving disparate diagnostic criteria used to classify fvAD cohorts, contributing to variation in findings.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sept 2023 |