Language impairment in the genetic forms of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behavioural variant fronto-temporal dementia (bvFTD) is characterised by a progressive change in personality in association with atrophy of the frontal and temporal lobes. Whilst language impairment has been described in people with bvFTD, little is currently known about the extent or type of linguistic difficulties that occur, particularly in the genetic forms. METHODS: Participants with genetic bvFTD along with healthy controls were recruited from the international multicentre Genetic FTD Initiative (GENFI). Linguistic symptoms were assessed using items from the Progressive Aphasia Severity Scale (PASS). Additionally, participants undertook the Boston Naming Test (BNT), modified Camel and Cactus Test (mCCT) and a category fluency test. Participants underwent a 3T volumetric T1-weighted MRI, with language network regional brain volumes measured and compared between the genetic groups and controls. RESULTS: 76% of the genetic bvFTD cohort had impairment in at least one language symptom: 83% C9orf72, 80% MAPT and 56% GRN mutation carriers. All three genetic groups had significantly impaired functional communication, decreased fluency, and impaired sentence comprehension. C9orf72 mutation carriers also had significantly impaired articulation and word retrieval as well as dysgraphia whilst the MAPT mutation group also had impaired word retrieval and single word comprehension. All three groups had difficulties with naming, semantic knowledge and verbal fluency. Atrophy in key left perisylvian language regions differed between the groups, with generalised involvement in the C9orf72 group and more focal temporal and insula involvement in the other groups. Correlates of language symptoms and test scores also differed between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Language deficits exist in a substantial proportion of people with familial bvFTD across all three genetic groups. Significant atrophy is seen in the dominant perisylvian language areas and correlates with language impairments within each of the genetic groups. Improved understanding of the language phenotype in the main genetic bvFTD subtypes will be helpful in future studies, particularly in clinical trials where accurate stratification and monitoring of disease progression is required.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".