The pathology-based classification of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other neurodegenerative diseases is a work in progress that is important for both clinicians and basic scientists. Analyses of large autopsy series, biomarker studies, and genomics analyses have provided important insights about AD and shed light on previously unrecognized conditions, enabling a deeper understanding of neurodegenerative diseases in general. After demonstrating the importance of correct disease classification for AD and primary age-related tauopathy, we emphasize the public health impact of an underappreciated AD "mimic," which has been termed "hippocampal sclerosis of aging" or "hippocampal sclerosis dementia." This pathology affects >20% of individuals older than 85 years and is strongly associated with cognitive impairment. In this review, we provide an overview of current hypotheses about how genetic risk factors (GRN, TMEM106B, ABCC9, and KCNMB2), and other pathogenetic influences contribute to TDP-43 pathology and hippocampal sclerosis. Because hippocampal sclerosis of aging affects the "oldest-old" with arteriolosclerosis and TDP-43 pathologies that extend well beyond the hippocampus, more appropriate terminology for this disease is required. We recommend "cerebral age-related TDP-43 and sclerosis" (CARTS). A detailed case report is presented, which includes neuroimaging and longitudinal neurocognitive data. Finally, we suggest a neuropathology-based diagnostic rubric for CARTS.

This study aimed to assess the applicability of miR‐375 in combination with the soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) protein as a diagnostic and/or prognostic biomarker for prostate cancer (PCa) patients. miR‐375 levels by qRT‐PCR and suPAR levels by ELISA were evaluated in serum samples from 146 PCa patients, 35 benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) patients and 18 healthy controls. Antigen levels of suPAR differed between healthy controls and PCa or BPH patients, whereas miR‐375 levels differed between PCa and BPH patients or healthy controls (p < 0.001). Additionally, suPAR levels differed between the Gleason sum groups GS = 7 versus GS > 7, with higher levels in the latter group (p = 0.011), and miR‐375 levels were higher in the tumor stage group T3‐T4 compared with the T1‐T2 group (p = 0.039). A high concentration of suPAR was associated with a poor disease‐specific survival (DSS; p = 0.039). The combination of suPAR and miR‐375 levels identified a patient group possessing high levels for both parameters. This was associated with a poorer 10‐year overall survival (OS) and DSS, with a 6.38‐fold increased risk of death and a 7.68‐fold increased risk of tumor‐related death (p = 0.00026 and p = 0.014; univariate Cox's regression analysis). In a multivariate Cox's regression analysis PCa patients with high levels of suPAR and miR‐375 showed a 5.72‐fold increased risk of death in OS (p = 0.006). In summary, the differences between the PCa/BPH/healthy control cohorts for either suPAR and miR‐375 levels in conjunction with the association of combined high suPAR/miR‐375 levels with a poor prognosis suggest a diagnostic and prognostic impact for PCa patients.