Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Getting a diagnosis

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), the second common primary degenerative neurocognitive disorder after Alzheimer disease (AD), frequently presents concurrent co-pathologies that impact clinical presentation and progression. Neuropathological studies have demonstrated a high prevalence of coexistent AD-related neuropathological changes (ADNC), TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) proteinopathies, and cardiac and aging-related disorders, while frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and tau-related syndromes play a minor role as DLB-related co-pathologies. Cerebrovascular lesions, including cerebral amyloid angiopathy, are the most prevalent non-neurodegenerative co-pathologies. Cardiovascular disorders, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia are also frequent comorbidities. Due to their high prevalence and clinical impact on DLB patients, clinical trials should account for these and other co-pathologies in their design and selection. Evaluation of these co-pathologies using and interpreting biomarkers may allow greater clinical diagnostic accuracy and the opportunity to better predict clinical progression. Therefore, there is an increasing need for biomarkers in dementia research. This review discusses the kind and frequency of the different co-pathologies in DLB and their clinical impact. It evaluates the possible value of disease-specific biomarkers and how they are helpful in the assessment and prevention of DLB and its co-pathologies.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Jellinger, K. A. (2025). Comorbid Pathologies and Their Impact on Dementia with Lewy Bodies—Current View. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26167674

Vancouver

Jellinger KA. Comorbid Pathologies and Their Impact on Dementia with Lewy Bodies—Current View. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2025. doi:10.3390/ijms26167674. PMID: 40868991.

BibTeX

@article{jellinger2025-40868991,
  author  = {Jellinger, K. A.},
  title   = {{Comorbid Pathologies and Their Impact on Dementia with Lewy Bodies—Current View}},
  journal = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.3390/ijms26167674},
  pmid    = {40868991},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26167674}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

This review discusses how common co-pathologies in dementia with Lewy bodies affect clinical presentation and progression. It suggests that clinical trials should account for these co-pathologies and that biomarkers may improve diagnostic accuracy, but it does not report new treatments or cures.

Study details

How this study scored 42/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 3 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 2 of 7; Citations per year 1 of 5; Impact for its field and year 3 of 6; Cited by studies here 1 of 6; Still being cited 1 of 4; Senior author's track record 4 of 4; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration 0 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 41 of the 97 points it could be judged on, which is 42 of 100. Total 42 of 100.41 of the 97 points we could judge = 42 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on institution's track record, so that was left out: it earned 41 of the 97 points we could judge it on, which is 42 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International Journal of Molecular Sciences)
Journal's citation record 3 / 4 International Journal of Molecular Sciences: journal h-index 426 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 4 / 5 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 2 / 7 Cited 7 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 1 / 5 2.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year 3 / 6 Cited 4.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 1 / 6 Cited by 1 other studies in this library
Still being cited 1 / 4 Cited 7 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 4 / 4 Last-listed author K. A. Jellinger: h-index 137 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration 0 / 3 OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40868991)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 41 / 97 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 97 points we could judge it on is 42 out of 100.
Total 42 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 58.

Later studies that cite this one

1 study in the alzhub library lists this one in its references.

Related studies in Getting a diagnosis

Also tagged “bodies”

1,017 studies in the library carry the topic tag “bodies”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,017 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Getting a diagnosis

See all studies in Getting a diagnosis →