Mixed TDP-43 proteinopathy and tauopathy in frontotemporal lobar degeneration: nine case series.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical, anatomical, genetic and pathological features of dual frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) pathology: FTLD-tau and FTLD-TDP-43 in a large clinicopathological cohort. METHODS: We selected subjects with mixed FTLD-TDP and FTLD-tau from 247 FTLD cases from the University of California, San Francisco, Neurodegenerative Disease Brain Bank collected between 2000 and 2016 and compared their clinical, anatomical, genetic, imaging and pathological signatures with those of subjects with pure FTLD. RESULTS: We found nine cases (3.6%) with prominent FTLD-TDP and FTLD-tau. Six cases were sporadic, whereas one case had a C9ORF72 expansion, another had a TARDBP A90V variant, and the other had an MAPT p.A152T variant. The subtypes of FTLD-TDP and FTLD-tau varied. Mixed FTLD cases were older and tended to show a higher burden of Alzheimer disease pathology (3/9, 33%). The neuroimaging signature of mixed cases, in general, included more widespread atrophy than that of pure groups. Specifically, cases of mixed corticobasal degeneration (CBD) with FTLD-TDP showed more prominent asymmetric left-sided atrophy than did those of pure CBD. However, the clinical phenotype of mixed cases was similar to that seen in pure FTLD. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with mixed FTLD-TDP and FTLD-tau are rare, in-depth clinical, pathological and genetic investigations may shed light on the genetic and biochemical pathways that cause the accumulation of multiple proteinaceous inclusions and inform therapeutic targets that may be beneficial to each one of these abnormal protein misfoldings.

Distinct Subtypes of Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia Based on Patterns of Network Degeneration.

IMPORTANCE: Clearer delineation of the phenotypic heterogeneity within behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) will help uncover underlying biological mechanisms and improve clinicians' ability to predict disease course and to design targeted management strategies. OBJECTIVE: To identify subtypes of bvFTD syndrome based on distinctive patterns of atrophy defined by selective vulnerability of specific functional networks targeted in bvFTD using statistical classification approaches. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: In this retrospective observational study, 90 patients meeting the Frontotemporal Dementia Consortium consensus criteria for bvFTD underwent evaluation at the Memory and Aging Center of the Department of Neurology at University of California, San Francisco. Patients underwent a multidisciplinary clinical evaluation, including clinical demographics, genetic testing, symptom evaluation, neurologic examination, neuropsychological bedside testing, and socioemotional assessments. All patients underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging at their earliest evaluation at the memory clinic. From each patient's structural imaging scans, the mean volumes of 18 regions of interest (ROI) constituting the functional networks specifically vulnerable in bvFTD, including the salience network (SN), with key nodes in the frontoinsula and pregenual anterior cingulate, and the semantic appraisal network (SAN), anchored in the anterior temporal lobe and subgenual cingulate, were estimated. Principal component and cluster analyses of ROI volumes were used to identify patient clusters with anatomically distinct atrophy patterns. Data were collected from from June 19, 2002, to January 13, 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Evaluation of brain morphology and other clinical features, including presenting symptoms, neurologic examination signs, neuropsychological performance, rate of dementia progression, and socioemotional function, in each patient cluster. RESULTS: Ninety patients (54 men [60%]; 36 women [40%]; mean [SD] age at evaluation, 55.1 [9.7] years) were included in the analysis. Four subgroups of patients with bvFTD with distinct anatomic patterns of network degeneration were identified, including 2 salience network-predominant subgroups (frontal/temporal [SN-FT] and frontal [SN-F]), a semantic appraisal network-predominant group (SAN), and a subcortical-predominant group. Subgroups demonstrated distinct patterns of cognitive, socioemotional, and motor symptoms, as well as genetic compositions and estimated rates of disease progression. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Divergent patterns of vulnerability in specific functional network components make an important contribution to the clinical heterogeneity of bvFTD. The data-driven anatomic classification identifies biologically meaningful anatomic phenotypes and provides a replicable approach to disambiguate the bvFTD syndrome.