Explore the vast range of titles available.

A diagnosis of dementia is devastating at any age but diagnosis in younger patients presents a particular challenge. The differential diagnosis is broad as late presentation of metabolic disease is common and the burden of inherited dementia is higher in these patients than in patients with late-onset dementia. The presentation of the common degenerative diseases of late life, such as Alzheimer's disease, can be different when presenting in the fifth or sixth decade. Moreover, many of the young-onset dementias are treatable. The identification of causative genes for many of the inherited degenerative dementias has led to an understanding of the molecular pathology, which is also applicable to later-onset sporadic disease. This understanding offers the potential for future treatments to be tailored to a specific diagnosis of both young-onset and late-onset dementia.

Adult-onset leukodystrophies and genetic leukoencephalopathies comprise a diverse group of neurodegenerative disorders of white matter with a wide age of onset and phenotypic spectrum. Patients with white matter abnormalities detected on MRI often present a diagnostic challenge to both general and specialist neurologists. Patients typically present with a progressive syndrome including various combinations of cognitive impairment, movement disorders, ataxia and upper motor neuron signs. There are a number of important and treatable acquired causes for this imaging and clinical presentation. There are also a very large number of genetic causes which due to their relative rarity and sometimes variable and overlapping presentations can be difficult to diagnose. In this review, we provide a structured approach to the diagnosis of inherited disorders of white matter in adults. We describe clinical and radiological clues to aid diagnosis, and we present an overview of both common and rare genetic white matter disorders. We provide advice on testing for acquired causes, on excluding small vessel disease mimics, and detailed advice on metabolic and genetic testing available to the practising neurologist. Common genetic leukoencephalopathies discussed in detail include CSF1R, AARS2, cerebral arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL), and mitochondrial and metabolic disorders.

Studies supporting a strong association between tau deposition and neuronal loss, neurodegeneration, and cognitive decline have heightened the allure of tau and tau-related mechanisms as therapeutic targets. In February 2020, leading tau experts from around the world convened for the first-ever Tau2020 Global Conference in Washington, DC, co-organized and cosponsored by the Rainwater Charitable Foundation, the Alzheimer's Association, and CurePSP. Representing academia, industry, government, and the philanthropic sector, presenters and attendees discussed recent advances and current directions in tau research. The meeting provided a unique opportunity to move tau research forward by fostering global partnerships among academia, industry, and other stakeholders and by providing support for new drug discovery programs, groundbreaking research, and emerging tau researchers. The meeting also provided an opportunity for experts to present critical research-advancing tools and insights that are now rapidly accelerating the pace of tau research.

The primary progressive aphasias are a heterogeneous group of focal ‘language-led’ dementias that pose substantial challenges for diagnosis and management. Here we present a clinical approach to the progressive aphasias, based on our experience of these disorders and directed at non-specialists. We first outline a framework for assessing language, tailored to the common presentations of progressive aphasia. We then consider the defining features of the canonical progressive nonfluent, semantic and logopenic aphasic syndromes, including ‘clinical pearls’ that we have found diagnostically useful and neuroanatomical and other key associations of each syndrome. We review potential diagnostic pitfalls and problematic presentations not well captured by conventional classifications and propose a diagnostic ‘roadmap’. After outlining principles of management, we conclude with a prospect for future progress in these diseases, emphasising generic information processing deficits and novel pathophysiological biomarkers.

Understanding hope and better appreciating the personal investments of trial participants could improve patient experience and trial design, argue Emma Harding, Catherine Mummery, and colleagues

Tau plays a key role in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathophysiology, and accumulating evidence suggests that lowering tau may reduce this pathology. We sought to inhibit MAPT expression with a tau-targeting antisense oligonucleotide (MAPT Rx ) and reduce tau levels in patients with mild AD. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-ascending dose phase 1b trial evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics and target engagement of MAPT Rx . Four ascending dose cohorts were enrolled sequentially and randomized 3:1 to intrathecal bolus administrations of MAPT Rx or placebo every 4 or 12 weeks during the 13-week treatment period, followed by a 23 week post-treatment period. The primary endpoint was safety. The secondary endpoint was MAPT Rx pharmacokinetics in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). The prespecified key exploratory outcome was CSF total-tau protein concentration. Forty-six patients enrolled in the trial, of whom 34 were randomized to MAPT Rx and 12 to placebo. Adverse events were reported in 94% of MAPT Rx -treated patients and 75% of placebo-treated patients; all were mild or moderate. No serious adverse events were reported in MAPT Rx -treated patients. Dose-dependent reduction in the CSF total-tau concentration was observed with greater than 50% mean reduction from baseline at 24 weeks post-last dose in the 60 mg (four doses) and 115 mg (two doses) MAPT Rx groups. Clinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT03186989 . Evaluation of a tau-targeting antisense oligonucleotide in a phase 1 trial of patients with mild AD found it was well tolerated and resulted in a sustained reduction of tau protein levels.

Hearing deficits associated with cognitive impairment have attracted much recent interest, motivated by emerging evidence that impaired hearing is a risk factor for cognitive decline. However, dementia and hearing impairment present immense challenges in their own right, and their intersection in the auditory brain remains poorly understood and difficult to assess. Here, we outline a clinically oriented, symptom-based approach to the assessment of hearing in dementias, informed by recent progress in the clinical auditory neuroscience of these diseases. We consider the significance and interpretation of hearing loss and symptoms that point to a disorder of auditory cognition in patients with dementia. We identify key auditory characteristics of some important dementias and conclude with a bedside approach to assessing and managing auditory dysfunction in dementia.

Background Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers are increasingly being used to support a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Their clinical utility for differentiating AD from non-AD neurodegenerative dementias, such as dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) or frontotemporal dementia (FTD), is less well established. We aimed to determine the diagnostic utility of an extended panel of CSF biomarkers to differentiate AD from a range of other neurodegenerative dementias. Methods We used immunoassays to measure conventional CSF markers of amyloid and tau pathology (amyloid beta (Aβ)1–42, total tau (T-tau), and phosphorylated tau (P-tau)) as well as amyloid processing (AβX-38, AβX-40, AβX-42, soluble amyloid precursor protein (sAPP)α, and sAPPβ), large fibre axonal degeneration (neurofilament light chain (NFL)), and neuroinflammation (YKL-40) in 245 patients with a variety of dementias and 30 controls. Patients fulfilled consensus criteria for AD ( n  = 156), DLB ( n  = 20), behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD; n  = 45), progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA; n  = 17), and semantic dementia (SD; n  = 7); approximately 10% were pathology/genetically confirmed ( n  = 26). Global tests based on generalised least squares regression were used to determine differences between groups. Non-parametric receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the curve (AUC) analyses were used to quantify how well each biomarker discriminated AD from each of the other diagnostic groups (or combinations of groups). CSF cut-points for the major biomarkers found to have diagnostic utility were validated using an independent cohort which included causes of AD ( n  = 104), DLB ( n  = 5), bvFTD ( n  = 12), PNFA ( n  = 3), SD ( n  = 9), and controls ( n  = 10). Results There were significant global differences in Aβ1–42, T-tau, T-tau/Aβ1–42 ratio, P-tau-181, NFL, AβX-42, AβX-42/X-40 ratio, APPα, and APPβ between groups. At a fixed sensitivity of 85%, AβX-42/X-40 could differentiate AD from controls, bvFTD, and SD with specificities of 93%, 85%, and 100%, respectively; for T-tau/Aβ1–42 these specificities were 83%, 70%, and 86%. AβX-42/X-40 had similar or higher specificity than Aβ1–42. No biomarker or ratio could differentiate AD from DLB or PNFA with specificity > 50%. Similar sensitivities and specificities were found in the independent validation cohort for differentiating AD and other dementias and in a pathology/genetically confirmed sub-cohort. Conclusions CSF AβX-42/X-40 and T-tau/Aβ1–42 ratios have utility in distinguishing AD from controls, bvFTD, and SD. None of the biomarkers tested had good specificity at distinguishing AD from DLB or PNFA.

BackgroundDisease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have early evidence of efficacy. Widespread delivery of DMTs will require major service reconfiguration. Treatment pathways will need to include triaging for eligibility, regular infusions and baseline and follow-up MRI scanning. A critical step in planning is provision of real-world estimates of patients likely to be eligible for triaging, but these are challenging to obtain.MethodsWe performed a retrospective service evaluation of patients attending five memory services across North and East London and a national specialist cognitive disorders service. We examined the likely proportion of patients who would (1) be referred for triaging for DMTs and (2) potentially be suitable for treatments.ResultsData from a total of 1017 patients were included, 517 of whom were seen in community memory services and 500 in a specialist clinic. In the memory services, 367/517 (71%) were diagnosed with possible AD. After exclusions of those in whom cognitive and frailty scores, MRI contraindications or anticoagulant use indicated they would be unlikely to be suitable, an estimated 32% would be eligible for triaging. In the specialist cognitive clinic, where additional investigations are available, 14% of those seen (70/500) would be potentially eligible for treatment.ConclusionsWhile a sizeable proportion of patients attending memory clinics may be referred for triaging for DMTs for AD, only a minority are likely to be suitable for these, as demonstrated in patients seen in specialist cognitive services. This will need to be considered when designing pathways for DMT delivery.

COVID-19 has led to seismic changes in neurological practice in a matter of weeks. The Association of British Neurologists has supported neurology specialists and patients during this rapid reorganisation and its attendant challenges. We have written guidance on structured service transformation, considering the need to sustain long term care while responding to acute developments; we have recognised that staff experience differs and that this, as well as individual risk factors should be considered when redeployment occurs. Appreciating that there may be understandable anxiety when facing a working routine outside normal practice, we have signposted ethical and psychological support for individuals. We have also focused on our patients: we have facilitated a national alert system to register all neurological COVID cases, coordinating research efforts on this new disease; finally we have defined how to identify the most vulnerable patients under our care. When this initial wave of the pandemic subsides, we will have planned for return to the new ‘norm’, ready to embrace innovation where appropriate, aiming to minimise fall-out in our chronic disease population, and potentially having enhanced and modernised our services.