Accurately predicting the underlying neuropathological diagnosis in patients with behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) poses a daunting challenge for clinicians but will be critical for the success of disease-modifying therapies. We sought to improve pathological prediction by exploring clinicopathological correlations in a large bvFTD cohort. Among 438 patients in whom bvFTD was either the top or an alternative possible clinical diagnosis, 117 had available autopsy data, including 98 with a primary pathological diagnosis of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), 15 with Alzheimer's disease, and four with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis who lacked neurodegenerative disease-related pathology outside of the motor system. Patients with FTLD were distributed between FTLD-tau (34 patients: 10 corticobasal degeneration, nine progressive supranuclear palsy, eight Pick's disease, three frontotemporal dementia with parkinsonism associated with chromosome 17, three unclassifiable tauopathy, and one argyrophilic grain disease); FTLD-TDP (55 patients: nine type A including one with motor neuron disease, 27 type B including 21 with motor neuron disease, eight type C with right temporal lobe presentations, and 11 unclassifiable including eight with motor neuron disease), FTLD-FUS (eight patients), and one patient with FTLD-ubiquitin proteasome system positive inclusions (FTLD-UPS) that stained negatively for tau, TDP-43, and FUS. Alzheimer's disease was uncommon (6%) among patients whose only top diagnosis during follow-up was bvFTD. Seventy-nine per cent of FTLD-tau, 86% of FTLD-TDP, and 88% of FTLD-FUS met at least 'possible' bvFTD diagnostic criteria at first presentation. The frequency of the six core bvFTD diagnostic features was similar in FTLD-tau and FTLD-TDP, suggesting that these features alone cannot be used to separate patients by major molecular class. Voxel-based morphometry revealed that nearly all pathological subgroups and even individual patients share atrophy in anterior cingulate, frontoinsula, striatum, and amygdala, indicating that degeneration of these regions is intimately linked to the behavioural syndrome produced by these diverse aetiologies. In addition to these unifying features, symptom profiles also differed among pathological subtypes, suggesting distinct anatomical vulnerabilities and informing a clinician's prediction of pathological diagnosis. Data-driven classification into one of the 10 most common pathological diagnoses was most accurate (up to 60.2%) when using a combination of known predictive factors (genetic mutations, motor features, or striking atrophy patterns) and the results of a discriminant function analysis that incorporated clinical, neuroimaging, and neuropsychological data.

Summary Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a progressive neurologic syndrome with diverse clinical presentations and attendant underlying pathologies. Psychiatric prodrome, neuropsychiatric symptoms and language difficulties are common in FTD, but the diversity of presentation raises unique diagnostic challenges that can significantly impact patient care and counsel for caregivers regarding clinical status and prognosis. While neuropsychiatric symptom measures are helpful, more sensitive assessments delineating the specific behavioral and linguistic deficits accompanying FTD are needed. Comprehensive clinical assessment in combination with evaluation of language, socio-emotional functioning, cognition and neuroimaging aid in accurate and early diagnosis and treatment planning. In what follows, we review each of the FTD syndromes, highlight current research investigating the cognitive, behavioral and socio-emotional deficits observed with this disease, address common diagnostic challenges and summarize best practices associated with management of FTD.

No abstract

Advances in neuroscience research are often enlisted as evidence for the belief that mental disorders are biologically based diseases of the brain, and have contributed to the continued prominence of the biomedical model within the field of mental health. Psychologists' use of neuroscience in marketing their services, explaining behavioral phenomena, and legitimizing the efficacy of psychotherapeutic treatments may contribute to "neurocentric" understandings of psychology, at the expense of a more comprehensive biopsychosocial model of mental disorders. These issues raise concerns about the ethical and responsible use of neuroscience language and research findings by psychologists in the promotion and practice of psychotherapy. This article reflects critically on the ethical principles and standards of the ethics code of the American Psychological Association (2010a) regarding competency, the basis of professional judgments, and the veracity of statements about psychotherapy, and provides considerations and recommendations for practicing psychologists, faculty, and graduate students when making use of neuroscience research.

No abstract

No abstract