Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Imaging and fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia
Meeter LH, Kaat LD, Rohrer JD, van Swieten JC.. Nature reviews. Neurology, 2017-06-16
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD), the second most common type of presenile dementia, is a heterogeneous neurodegenerative disease characterized by progressive behavioural and/or language problems, and includes a range of clinical, genetic and pathological subtypes. The diagnostic process is hampered by this heterogeneity, and correct diagnosis is becoming increasingly important to enable future clinical trials of disease-modifying treatments. Reliable biomarkers will enable us to better discriminate between FTD and other forms of dementia and to predict disease progression in the clinical setting. Given that different underlying pathologies probably require specific pharmacological interventions, robust biomarkers are essential for the selection of patients with specific FTD subtypes. This Review emphasizes the increasing availability and potential applications of structural and functional imaging biomarkers, and cerebrospinal fluid and blood fluid biomarkers in sporadic and genetic FTD. The relevance of new MRI modalities - such as voxel-based morphometry, diffusion tensor imaging and arterial spin labelling - in the early stages of FTD is discussed, together with the ability of these modalities to classify FTD subtypes. We highlight promising new fluid biomarkers for staging and monitoring of FTD, and underline the importance of large, multicentre studies of individuals with presymptomatic FTD. Harmonization in the collection and analysis of data across different centres is crucial for the implementation of new biomarkers in clinical practice, and will become a great challenge in the next few years.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Meeter, L. H., Kaat, L. D., Rohrer, J. D., & van Swieten, J. C. (2017). Imaging and fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia. Nature reviews. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2017.75
Vancouver
Meeter LH, Kaat LD, Rohrer JD, van Swieten JC. Imaging and fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia. Nature reviews. Neurology. 2017. doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2017.75. PMID: 28621768.
BibTeX
@article{meeter2017-28621768,
author = {Meeter, L. H. and Kaat, L. D. and Rohrer, J. D. and van Swieten, J. C.},
title = {{Imaging and fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia}},
journal = {Nature reviews. Neurology},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1038/nrneurol.2017.75},
pmid = {28621768},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2017.75}
}
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
- Given that different underlying pathologies probably require specific pharmacological interventions, robust biomarkers are essential for the selection of patients with specific FTD subtypes.
- This Review emphasizes the increasing availability and potential applications of structural and functional imaging biomarkers, and cerebrospinal fluid and blood fluid biomarkers in sporadic and genetic FTD.
- The relevance of new MRI modalities - such as voxel-based morphometry, diffusion tensor imaging and arterial spin labelling - in the early stages of FTD is discussed, together with the ability of these modalities to classify FTD subtypes.
- We highlight promising new fluid biomarkers for staging and monitoring of FTD, and underline the importance of large, multicentre studies of individuals with presymptomatic FTD.
- Harmonization in the collection and analysis of data across different centres is crucial for the implementation of new biomarkers in clinical practice, and will become a great challenge in the next few years.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 38/100
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 journal's citation record, 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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Nature reviews. Neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2017 — within 10 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 | — / 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 |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 28621768) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 22 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 100 | — |
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 Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “fluid-biomarkers”
6 studies in the library carry the topic tag “fluid-biomarkers”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 6 tagged studies.