Search

Background In the last decade, non-invasive blood-based and neurophysiological biomarkers have shown great potential for the discrimination of several neurodegenerative disorders. However, in the clinical workup of patients with cognitive impairment, it will be highly unlikely that any biomarker will achieve the highest potential predictive accuracy on its own, owing to the multifactorial nature of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). Methods In this retrospective study, performed on 202 participants, we analysed plasma neurofilament light (NfL), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and tau phosphorylated at amino acid 181 (p-Tau181) concentrations, as well as amyloid β42 to 40 ratio (Aβ1–42/1–40) ratio, using the ultrasensitive single-molecule array (Simoa) technique, and neurophysiological measures obtained by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), including short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), intracortical facilitation (ICF), long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI), and short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI). We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of combinations of both plasma and neurophysiological biomarkers in the differential diagnosis between healthy ageing, AD, and FTLD. Results We observed significant differences in plasma NfL, GFAP, and p-Tau181 levels between the groups, but not for the Aβ1–42/Aβ1–40 ratio. For the evaluation of diagnostic accuracy, we adopted a two-step process which reflects the clinical judgement on clinical grounds. In the first step, the best single biomarker to classify “cases” vs “controls” was NfL (AUC 0.94, p p 181, GFAP, NfL, SICI, ICF, and SAI, resulting in an AUC of 0.99 (p 1–42/Aβ1–40 ratio, p-Tau181, SICI, ICF, and SAI, resulting in an AUC of 0.98 (p Conclusions The combined assessment of plasma and neurophysiological measures may greatly improve the differential diagnosis of AD and FTLD.

Purpose: We aim to report the quality of accuracy studies investigating the utility of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET in supporting the diagnosis of prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease (AD), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and prodromal dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subjects, and the corresponding recommendations made by a panel of experts. Methods: Seven panellist, four from the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, and three from the European Academy of Neurology, produced recommendations taking into consideration the incremental value of FDG-PET, as added on clinical-neuropsychological examination, to ascertain the aetiology of MCI (AD, FTLD or DLB). A literature search using harmonized population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) strings was performed, and an evidence assessment consistent with the European Federation of Neurological Societies guidance was provided. The consensual recommendation was achieved based on Delphi rounds. Results: Fifty-four papers reported the comparison of interest. The selected papers allowed the identification of FDG patterns that characterized MCI due to AD, FTLD and DLB. While clinical outcome studies supporting the diagnosis of MCI due to AD showed varying accuracies (ranging from 58 to 100%) and varying areas under the receiver-operator characteristic curves (0.66 to 0.97), no respective data were identified for MCI due to FTLD or for MCI due to DLB. However, the high negative predictive value of FDG-PET and the existence of different disease-specific patterns of hypometabolism support the consensus recommendations for the clinical use of this imaging technique in MCI subjects. Conclusions: FDG-PET has clinical utility on a fair level of evidence in detecting MCI due to AD. Although promising also in detecting MCI due to FTLD and MCI due to DLB, more research is needed to ultimately judge the clinical utility of FDG-PET in these entities.