Extremely Early-Onset Frontotemporal Dementia: A Case Report and Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In most cases, the onset of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) occurs between the ages of 45 and 65 years. However, some patients experience an extremely early disease onset. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical, genetic, and pathological features of extremely early-onset FTD. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive clinical, genetic, and neuropathological analysis of a 25-year-old patient experiencing the onset of behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). In addition, we conducted a literature review and summarized the clinical, genetic, and pathological features of patients with FTD with onset age≤25 years. RESULTS: The patient was diagnosed with bvFTD; however, there was no family history of FTD, no positive genetic test results and no deposition of TDP43, tau, ubiquitin, and synuclein in the brain. Literature screening identified 18 patients with onset age ≤25 years with FTD. The youngest patient was 14 years of age. Most patients (8/14) had a positive family history. The most common clinical phenotype was the behavioral variant (12/14). Genetic results were reported for 11 patients; the most common pathogenic gene was MAPT (10/12), with four cases of G389 R, two cases of P301 S, one case of G335 S, one case of G335A, one case of G335 V, and one case of L315 R. Pathological results were reported for 13 patients; the most common pathological subtype was tau (8/13). CONCLUSION: FTD can start at an extremely early age. The most common phenotype of extremely early onset FTD was the behavioral variant, the most common pathogenic gene was MAPT, and the most common neuropathological type was tau.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".