MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4367296024 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000202815

Frontal cognitive-behavioural deficits in patients with anti-leucine-rich glioma-inactivated protein 1 antibody encephalitis (S22.004)

2023· article· en· W4367296024 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Sydney Lee, Seth Climans, Gregory S. Day, Julien Hébert, S. LaPointe, Ronald Ramos, Claude Steriade, Richard Wennberg, Alexandra Muccilli, David F. Tang‐Wai

Notice bibliographique

RevueNeurology · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAutoimmune Neurological Disorders and Treatments
Établissements canadiensToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkJuravinski HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésApathyDisinhibitionEncephalitisCognitionNeuropsychologyPsychologyDementiaFrontotemporal dementiaCognitive declineFrontal lobePediatricsPsychiatryMedicineClinical psychologyInternal medicineDiseaseImmunology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Objective: To determine the prevalence of a frontal cognitive-behavioural phenotype in patients with anti-leucine-rich glioma-inactivated protein 1 (LGI1) encephalitis. Background: Cognitive impairment is a common manifestation of anti-LGI1 encephalitis and is typically defined as prominent memory deficits. We frequently encounter frontal cognitive-behavioural deficits when evaluating these patients, but this has yet to be well described in the literature. Design/Methods: We retrospectively identified patients from three tertiary centres in Toronto, Ontario who were diagnosed with anti-LGI1 encephalitis between October 2013 and September 2022. Patient electronic medical records were evaluated for cognitive features and frontal features were categorized based on the diagnostic criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). Results: Fifteen patients were identified (median age 65 years [range 18–84]; 8 [53.3%] male). Fourteen (93.3%) patients had cognitive symptoms that localized to the frontal lobe. Two developed these symptoms during treatment with steroids and were therefore excluded from further analysis. The remaining 12 patients presented with behavioural disinhibition (n=11), apathy or inertia (n=5), perseverative, stereotyped or compulsive/ritualistic behaviours (n=4), hyperorality and dietary changes (n=4), a neuropsychological profile with predominant deficits in executive tasks (n=4), and loss of sympathy or empathy (n=1). Seven (46.7%) met diagnostic criteria for possible bvFTD. Of these, 3 had significant functional decline and none had neuroimaging findings consistent with bvFTD. Anterograde memory impairment was common (n=11), and patients also presented with language deficits (n=3) and difficulties with spatial navigation (n=3). Of the 12 patients with frontal symptoms, only 5 had faciobrachial dystonic seizures. Conclusions: Patients with anti-LGI1 encephalitis can exhibit frontal cognitive-behavioural symptoms in addition to memory impairment, and screening for these features on clinical assessment may help to identify the diagnosis. Clinicians should also consider anti-LGI1 encephalitis in the differential diagnosis of bvFTD. Disclosure: Dr. Lee has nothing to disclose. Dr. Climans has nothing to disclose. Dr. Day has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Parabon Nanolabs. The institution of Dr. Day has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Consultant for Eli Lilly. Dr. Day has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for DynaMed (EBSCO Health). Dr. Day has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as an Expert Witness for Barrow Law. Dr. Day has stock in ANI Pharmaceuticals. The institution of Dr. Day has received research support from National Institutes of Health / NIA. The institution of Dr. Day has received research support from Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. The institution of Dr. Day has received research support from Alzheimer’s Association. The institution of Dr. Day has received research support from National Institutes of Health / NINDS. The institution of Dr. Day has received research support from Horizon Therapeutics. Dr. Day has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Presenter at Annual Meeting (CME) with American Academy of Neurology. Dr. Day has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Content Development (CME) with PeerView, Inc. Dr. Day has received personal compensation in the range of $5,000-$9,999 for serving as a Content Development (CME) with Continuing Education, Inc. Dr. Day has a non-compensated relationship as a Clinical Director with AntiNMDA Receptor Encephalitis Foundation that is relevant to AAN interests or activities. Dr. Hebert has nothing to disclose. Dr. Lapointe has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Alexion. Dr. Ramos has nothing to disclose. The institution of Dr. Steriade has received research support from NIH. The institution of Dr. Steriade has received research support from Dorris Duke Fund to Retain Clinician Scientists. Dr. Wennberg has nothing to disclose. Dr. Muccilli has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Biogen. Dr. Muccilli has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Novartis. Dr. Muccilli has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for EMD Serono. Dr. Tang-Wai has nothing to disclose.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,039
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,079

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,264
Écart entre enseignants0,247 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNeurologyMême sujetAutoimmune Neurological Disorders and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207