Consensus recommendations for clinical assessment tools for the diagnosis of posterior cortical atrophy syndrome from the Atypical AD PIA of ISTAART
(2023) In Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring 15(3).- Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Delay in diagnosis of posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) syndrome is common, and the lack of familiarity with assessment tools for identifying visual cortical dysfunction is a contributing factor. We propose recommendations for the approach to the evaluation of PCA clinical features during the office visit, the neuropsychological evaluation, and the research setting. A recommended screening battery for eye clinics is also proposed. METHODS: Recommendations were developed using results from a web-based survey of members of Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Atypical Alzheimer's Disease Professional Interest Area (PIA), literature review, and consensus by the... (More)
INTRODUCTION: Delay in diagnosis of posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) syndrome is common, and the lack of familiarity with assessment tools for identifying visual cortical dysfunction is a contributing factor. We propose recommendations for the approach to the evaluation of PCA clinical features during the office visit, the neuropsychological evaluation, and the research setting. A recommended screening battery for eye clinics is also proposed. METHODS: Recommendations were developed using results from a web-based survey of members of Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Atypical Alzheimer's Disease Professional Interest Area (PIA), literature review, and consensus by the PCA assessment working party of the Atypical Alzheimer's Disease PIA. RESULTS: Survey results revealed robust agreement for assessment tool preferences for PCA features, and many respondents indicated that they reserve assessment tools for use only when PCA is suspected. For some PCA features, curated tools were preferred over validated battery tools, particularly for the office visit. Consensus recommendations superseded survey preferences for two core cognitive features within the 2017 PCA diagnostic criteria. DISCUSSION: These consensus recommendations provide an evaluation framework for PCA clinical features and can facilitate timely and accurate recognition and diagnosis of PCA. Broader use of these tools should be sought, and development and validation of novel PCA clinical outcome assessments are needed to improve our understanding of atypical AD and other dementias and support the inclusion of those with PCA in treatment trials.
(Less)
- author
- organization
- publishing date
- 2023-07-01
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Alzheimer's disease, assessment tools, Atypical Alzheimer's Disease Professional Interest Area, clinical outcome assessments, PCA clinical features, posterior cortical atrophy
- in
- Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring
- volume
- 15
- issue
- 3
- article number
- e12474
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85171735446
- ISSN
- 2352-8729
- DOI
- 10.1002/dad2.12474
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 267af93a-83f9-49b7-a52e-ddc48146a4d3
- date added to LUP
- 2023-12-19 12:54:40
- date last changed
- 2023-12-19 12:57:06
@article{267af93a-83f9-49b7-a52e-ddc48146a4d3, abstract = {{<p>INTRODUCTION: Delay in diagnosis of posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) syndrome is common, and the lack of familiarity with assessment tools for identifying visual cortical dysfunction is a contributing factor. We propose recommendations for the approach to the evaluation of PCA clinical features during the office visit, the neuropsychological evaluation, and the research setting. A recommended screening battery for eye clinics is also proposed. METHODS: Recommendations were developed using results from a web-based survey of members of Alzheimer's Association International Society to Advance Alzheimer's Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Atypical Alzheimer's Disease Professional Interest Area (PIA), literature review, and consensus by the PCA assessment working party of the Atypical Alzheimer's Disease PIA. RESULTS: Survey results revealed robust agreement for assessment tool preferences for PCA features, and many respondents indicated that they reserve assessment tools for use only when PCA is suspected. For some PCA features, curated tools were preferred over validated battery tools, particularly for the office visit. Consensus recommendations superseded survey preferences for two core cognitive features within the 2017 PCA diagnostic criteria. DISCUSSION: These consensus recommendations provide an evaluation framework for PCA clinical features and can facilitate timely and accurate recognition and diagnosis of PCA. Broader use of these tools should be sought, and development and validation of novel PCA clinical outcome assessments are needed to improve our understanding of atypical AD and other dementias and support the inclusion of those with PCA in treatment trials.</p>}}, author = {{Pelak, Victoria S. and Tang-Wai, David F. and Boeve, Bradley F. and Bouwman, Femke H. and Graff-Radford, Jonathan and Rabinovici, Gil and Holden, Samantha K. and Townley, Ryan A. and Day, Gregory S. and Whitwell, Jennifer and Ossenkoppele, Rik and Boon, Baayla D.C. and Putcha, Deepti and Onyike, Chiadi U. and Snyder, Heather and Crutch, Sebastian and Yong, Keir X.X.}}, issn = {{2352-8729}}, keywords = {{Alzheimer's disease; assessment tools; Atypical Alzheimer's Disease Professional Interest Area; clinical outcome assessments; PCA clinical features; posterior cortical atrophy}}, language = {{eng}}, month = {{07}}, number = {{3}}, publisher = {{Elsevier}}, series = {{Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring}}, title = {{Consensus recommendations for clinical assessment tools for the diagnosis of posterior cortical atrophy syndrome from the Atypical AD PIA of ISTAART}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12474}}, doi = {{10.1002/dad2.12474}}, volume = {{15}}, year = {{2023}}, }