Home › Research › Brain tissue and pathology
A limbic-predominant amnestic neurodegenerative syndrome associated with TDP-43 pathology
Nick Corriveau-Lecavalier, Hugo Botha, Jonathan Graff-Radford, Aaron R Switzer, Scott A Przybelski, Heather J Wiste, Melissa E Murray, R Ross Reichard et al.. medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2023-11-20
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
When seen in isolation, LATE-NC have been associated with a predominantly amnestic profile and slow clinical progression. We propose a set of clinical criteria for a limbic-predominant amnestic neurodegenerative syndrome (LANS) that is highly associated with LATE-NC but also other pathologic entities. Patients with high LANS likelihoods had a milder and slower clinical course and more severe temporo-limbic degeneration compared to those with low likelihoods. Stratifying ADNC/LATE-NC patients from the Mayo cohort according to their LANS likelihood revealed that those with higher likelihoods had more temporo-limbic degeneration and a slower rate of cognitive decline, and those with lower likelihoods had more lateral temporo-parietal degeneration and a faster rate of cognitive decline.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Corriveau-Lecavalier, N., Botha, H., Graff-Radford, J., Switzer, A. R., Przybelski, S. A., Wiste, H. J., et al. (2023). A limbic-predominant amnestic neurodegenerative syndrome associated with TDP-43 pathology. medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.11.19.23298314
Vancouver
Corriveau-Lecavalier N, Botha H, Graff-Radford J, Switzer AR, Przybelski SA, Wiste HJ, et al. A limbic-predominant amnestic neurodegenerative syndrome associated with TDP-43 pathology. medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences. 2023. doi:10.1101/2023.11.19.23298314. PMID: 38045300.
BibTeX
@article{corriveaulecavalier2023-38045300,
author = {Corriveau-Lecavalier, Nick and Botha, Hugo and Graff-Radford, Jonathan and Switzer, Aaron R and Przybelski, Scott A and Wiste, Heather J and Murray, Melissa E and Reichard, R Ross and others},
title = {{A limbic-predominant amnestic neurodegenerative syndrome associated with TDP-43 pathology}},
journal = {medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1101/2023.11.19.23298314},
pmid = {38045300},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.11.19.23298314}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- When seen in isolation, LATE-NC have been associated with a predominantly amnestic profile and slow clinical progression.
- We propose a set of clinical criteria for a limbic-predominant amnestic neurodegenerative syndrome (LANS) that is highly associated with LATE-NC but also other pathologic entities.
- Patients with high LANS likelihoods had a milder and slower clinical course and more severe temporo-limbic degeneration compared to those with low likelihoods.
- Stratifying ADNC/LATE-NC patients from the Mayo cohort according to their LANS likelihood revealed that those with higher likelihoods had more temporo-limbic degeneration and a slower rate of cognitive decline, and those with lower likelihoods had more lateral temporo-parietal degeneration and a faster rate of cognitive decline.
Study details
- Participants922
- Effect size74.6%; 73.3%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 35 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 60 points we could judge it on, which is 35 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 922 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 38045300) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 21 / 60 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 60 points we could judge it on is 35 out of 100. |
| Total | 35 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Brain tissue and pathology
Also in Brain tissue and pathology
124 studies in the library are filed under Brain tissue and pathology with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Brain tissue and pathology hub.