The Frontal-Anatomic Specificity of Design Fluency Repetitions and Their Diagnostic Relevance for Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia

Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94143-1207, USA.
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (Impact Factor: 2.96). 07/2012; 18(5):834-44. DOI: 10.1017/S1355617712000604
Source: PubMed


On tests of design fluency, an examinee draws as many different designs as possible in a specified time limit while avoiding repetition. The neuroanatomical substrates and diagnostic group differences of design fluency repetition errors and total correct scores were examined in 110 individuals diagnosed with dementia, 53 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 37 neurologically healthy controls. The errors correlated significantly with volumes in the right and left orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), the right and left superior frontal gyrus, the right inferior frontal gyrus, and the right striatum, but did not correlate with volumes in any parietal or temporal lobe regions. Regression analyses indicated that the lateral OFC may be particularly crucial for preventing these errors, even after excluding patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) from the analysis. Total correct correlated more diffusely with volumes in the right and left frontal and parietal cortex, the right temporal cortex, and the right striatum and thalamus. Patients diagnosed with bvFTD made significantly more repetition errors than patients diagnosed with MCI, Alzheimer's disease, semantic dementia, progressive supranuclear palsy, or corticobasal syndrome. In contrast, total correct design scores did not differentiate the dementia patients. These results highlight the frontal-anatomic specificity of design fluency repetitions. In addition, the results indicate that the propensity to make these errors supports the diagnosis of bvFTD. (JINS, 2012, 18, 1-11).

Download full-text


Available from: Serana Chester, Apr 04, 2014
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) represents a spectrum of non-Alzheimer's degenerative conditions associated with focal atrophy of the frontal and/or temporal lobes. Frontal and temporal regions of the brain have been shown to be strongly involved in executive function, social cognition and language processing and, thus, deficits in these domains are frequently seen in patients with FTD or may even be hallmarks of a specific FTD subtype (i.e. relatively selective and progressive language impairment in primary progressive aphasia). In this review we have attempted to delineate how language, executive function, and social cognition may contribute to the diagnosis of FTD syndromes, namely the behavioural variant FTD as well as the language variants of FTD including the three subtypes of primary progressive aphasia (PPA): non-fluent/agrammatic, semantic and logopenic. This review also addresses the extent to which deficits in these cognitive areas contribute to the differential diagnosis of FTD versus Alzheimer's disease (AD). Finally, early clinical determinants of pathology are briefly discussed and contemporary challenges to the diagnosis of FTD are presented.
    International Review of Psychiatry 04/2013; 25(2):178-96. DOI:10.3109/09540261.2013.763340 · 1.80 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: The objective of this study was to determine which aspects of executive functions are most affected in behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) and best differentiate this syndrome from Alzheimer disease (AD). Methods: We compared executive functions in 22 patients diagnosed with bvFTD, 26 with AD, and 31 neurologically healthy controls using a conceptually driven and comprehensive battery of executive function tests, the NIH EXAMINER battery ( Results: The bvFTD and the AD patients were similarly impaired compared with controls on tests of working memory, category fluency, and attention, but the patients with bvFTD showed significantly more severe impairments than the patients with AD on tests of letter fluency, antisaccade accuracy, social decision-making, and social behavior. Discriminant function analysis with jackknifed cross-validation classified the bvFTD and AD patient groups with 73% accuracy. Conclusions: Executive function assessment can support bvFTD diagnosis when measures are carefully selected to emphasize frontally specific functions.
    Neurology 05/2013; 80(24). DOI:10.1212/WNL.0b013e318296e940 · 8.29 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Disruptions in emotional, cognitive, and social behavior are common in neurodegenerative disease and in many forms of psychopathology. Because neurodegenerative diseases have patterns of brain atrophy that are much clearer than those of psychiatric disorders, they may provide a window into the neural bases of common emotional and behavioral symptoms.Wediscuss five common symptoms that occur in both neurodegenerative disease and psychopathology (i.e., anxiety, dysphoric mood, apathy, disinhibition, and euphoric mood) and their associated neural circuitry. We focus on two neurodegenerative diseases (i.e., Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia) that are common and well characterized in terms of emotion, cognition, and social behavior and in patterns of associated atrophy. Neurodegenerative diseases provide a powerful model system for studying the neural correlates of psychopathological symptoms; this is supported by evidence indicating convergence with psychiatric syndromes (e.g., symptoms of disinhibition associated with dysfunction in orbitofrontal cortex in both frontotemporal dementia and bipolar disorder). We conclude that neurodegenerative diseases can play an important role in future approaches to the assessment, prevention, and treatment of mental illness. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Clinical Psychology Volume 10 is March 20, 2014. Please see for revised estimates.
    Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 01/2014; 10(1). DOI:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153653 · 12.67 Impact Factor
Show more