Based on the recent literature and collective experience, an international consortium developed revised guidelines for the diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. The validation process retrospectively reviewed clinical records and compared the sensitivity of proposed and earlier criteria in a multi-site sample of patients with pathologically verified frontotemporal lobar degeneration. According to the revised criteria, 'possible' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia requires three of six clinically discriminating features (disinhibition, apathy/inertia, loss of sympathy/empathy, perseverative/compulsive behaviours, hyperorality and dysexecutive neuropsychological profile). 'Probable' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia adds functional disability and characteristic neuroimaging, while behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia 'with definite frontotemporal lobar degeneration' requires histopathological confirmation or a pathogenic mutation. Sixteen brain banks contributed cases meeting histopathological criteria for frontotemporal lobar degeneration and a clinical diagnosis of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia, Alzheimer's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies or vascular dementia at presentation. Cases with predominant primary progressive aphasia or extra-pyramidal syndromes were excluded. In these autopsy-confirmed cases, an experienced neurologist or psychiatrist ascertained clinical features necessary for making a diagnosis according to previous and proposed criteria at presentation. Of 137 cases where features were available for both proposed and previously established criteria, 118 (86%) met 'possible' criteria, and 104 (76%) met criteria for 'probable' behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. In contrast, 72 cases (53%) met previously established criteria for the syndrome (P < 0.001 for comparison with 'possible' and 'probable' criteria). Patients who failed to meet revised criteria were significantly older and most had atypical presentations with marked memory impairment. In conclusion, the revised criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia improve diagnostic accuracy compared with previously established criteria in a sample with known frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Greater sensitivity of the proposed criteria may reflect the optimized diagnostic features, less restrictive exclusion features and a flexible structure that accommodates different initial clinical presentations. Future studies will be needed to establish the reliability and specificity of these revised diagnostic guidelines.

Eleven susceptibility loci for late-onset Alzheimer’s disease (LOAD) were identified by previous studies; however, a large portion of the genetic risk for this disease remains unexplained. We conducted a large, two-stage meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) in individuals of European ancestry. In stage 1, we used genotyped and imputed data (7,055,881 SNPs) to perform meta-analysis on 4 previously published GWAS data sets consisting of 17,008 Alzheimer’s disease cases and 37,154 controls. In stage 2,11,632 SNPs were genotyped and tested for association in an independent set of 8,572 Alzheimer’s disease cases and 11,312 controls. In addition to the APOE locus (encoding apolipoprotein E), 19 loci reached genome-wide significance (P < 5 × 10−8) in the combined stage 1 and stage 2 analysis, of which 11 are newly associated with Alzheimer’s disease.

Diego. ADNI data are disseminated by the Laboratory for Neuro Imaging at the University of Southern California. We thank Drs. D. Stephen Snyder and Marilyn Miller from NIA who are ex-officio ADGC members. EADI. This work has been developed and supported by the LABEX (laboratory of excellence program investment for the future) DISTALZ grant (Development of Innovative Strategies for a Transdisciplinary approach to ALZheimer's disease) including funding from MEL (Metropole européenne de Lille), ERDF (European Regional Development Fund) and Conseil Régional Rotterdam, Netherlands Organization for the Health Research and Development (ZonMw), the Research Institute for Diseases in the Elderly (RIDE), the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, the Ministry for Health, Welfare and Sports, the European Commission (DG XII), and the Municipality of Rotterdam. The authors are grateful to the study participants, the staff from the Rotterdam Study and the participating general practitioners and pharmacists. The generation and management of GWAS genotype data for the Rotterdam Study (RS-I, RS-II, RS-III) was executed by the Human Genotyping Facility of the Genetic Laboratory of the

IntroductionLate-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD, onset age > 60 years) is the most prevalent dementia in the elderly 1 , and risk is partially driven by genetics 2 . Many of the loci responsible for this genetic risk were identified by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) [3][4][5][6][7][8] . To identify additional LOAD risk loci, the we performed the largest GWAS to date (89,769 individuals), analyzing both common and rare variants. We confirm 20 previous LOAD risk loci and identify four new genome-wide loci (IQCK, ACE, ADAM10, and ADAMTS1). Pathway analysis of these data implicates the immune system and lipid metabolism, and for the first time tau binding proteins and APP metabolism. These findings show that genetic variants affecting APP and Aβ processing are not only associated with early-onset autosomal dominant AD but also with LOAD. Analysis of AD risk genes and pathways show enrichment for rare variants (P = 1.32 x 10 -7 ) indicating that additional rare variants remain to be identified. Main TextOur previous work identified 19 genome-wide significant common variant signals in addition to APOE 9 , that influence risk for LOAD. These signals, combined with 'subthreshold' common variant associations, account for ~31% of the genetic variance of LOAD 2 , leaving the majority of genetic risk uncharacterized 10 . To search for additional signals, we conducted a GWAS metaanalysis of non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) using a larger sample (17 new, 46 total datasets) from our group, the International Genomics of Alzheimer's Project (IGAP) (composed of four AD consortia: ADGC, CHARGE, EADI, and GERAD). This sample increases our previous discovery sample (Stage 1) by 29% for cases and 13% for controls (N=21,982 cases; 41,944 controls) ( Supplementary Table 1 and 2, and Supplementary Note). To sample both common and rare variants (minor allele frequency MAF ≥ 0.01, and MAF < 0.01, respectively), we imputed the discovery datasets using a 1000 Genomes reference panel consisting of . CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license peer-reviewed) is the author/funder. It is made available under a 11 36,648,992 single-nucleotide variants, 1,380,736 insertions/deletions, and 13,805 structural variants. After quality control, 9,456,058 common variants and 2,024,574 rare variants were selected for analysis (a 63% increase from our previous common variant analysis in 2013).Genotype dosages were analyzed within each dataset, and then combined with meta-analysis ( Supplementary Figures 1 and 2 and Supplementary Table 3). The Stage 1 discovery metaanalysis was first followed by Stage 2 using the I-select chip we previously developed in Lambert et al (including 11,632 variants, N=18,845) and finally stage 3A (N=6,998). The final sample was 33,692 clinical AD cases and 56,077 controls.Meta-analysis of Stages 1 and 2 produced 21 associations with P ≤ 5x10 -8 (Table 1 and Figure 1). Of these, 18 were previously reported as genome-wide significant and three of them are signals not initially described in Lambert et al: the rare R47H TREM2 coding va...