Ebselen analogues delay disease onset and its course in fALS by on-target SOD-1 engagement.

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) selectively affects motor neurons. SOD1 is the first causative gene to be identified for ALS and accounts for at least 20% of the familial (fALS) and up to 4% of sporadic (sALS) cases globally with some geographical variability. The destabilisation of the SOD1 dimer is a key driving force in fALS and sALS. Protein aggregation resulting from the destabilised SOD1 is arrested by the clinical drug ebselen and its analogues (MR6-8-2 and MR6-26-2) by redeeming the stability of the SOD1 dimer. The in vitro target engagement of these compounds is demonstrated using the bimolecular fluorescence complementation assay with protein-ligand binding directly visualised by co-crystallography in G93A SOD1. MR6-26-2 offers neuroprotection slowing disease onset of SOD1G93A mice by approximately 15 days. It also protected neuromuscular junction from muscle denervation in SOD1G93A mice clearly indicating functional improvement.

Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia.

Based on the recent literature and collective experience, an international consortium developed revised guidelines for the diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. The validation process retrospectively reviewed clinical records and compared the sensitivity of proposed and earlier criteria in a multi-site sample of patients with pathologically verified frontotemporal lobar degeneration. According to the revised criteria, 'possible' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia requires three of six clinically discriminating features (disinhibition, apathy/inertia, loss of sympathy/empathy, perseverative/compulsive behaviours, hyperorality and dysexecutive neuropsychological profile). 'Probable' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia adds functional disability and characteristic neuroimaging, while behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia 'with definite frontotemporal lobar degeneration' requires histopathological confirmation or a pathogenic mutation. Sixteen brain banks contributed cases meeting histopathological criteria for frontotemporal lobar degeneration and a clinical diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, Alzheimer's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies or vascular dementia at presentation. Cases with predominant primary progressive aphasia or extra-pyramidal syndromes were excluded. In these autopsy-confirmed cases, an experienced neurologist or psychiatrist ascertained clinical features necessary for making a diagnosis according to previous and proposed criteria at presentation. Of 137 cases where features were available for both proposed and previously established criteria, 118 (86%) met 'possible' criteria, and 104 (76%) met criteria for 'probable' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. In contrast, 72 cases (53%) met previously established criteria for the syndrome (P < 0.001 for comparison with 'possible' and 'probable' criteria). Patients who failed to meet revised criteria were significantly older and most had atypical presentations with marked memory impairment. In conclusion, the revised criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia improve diagnostic accuracy compared with previously established criteria in a sample with known frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Greater sensitivity of the proposed criteria may reflect the optimized diagnostic features, less restrictive exclusion features and a flexible structure that accommodates different initial clinical presentations. Future studies will be needed to establish the reliability and specificity of these revised diagnostic guidelines.