Division of Neuropathology, Department of Pathology, University of Kentucky Medical Center, University of Kentucky, Rm 311, Sanders-Brown Building, 800 S. Limestone, Lexington, KY 40536-0230, USA.
J Neurol. 2010 Mar;257(3):359-66. doi: 10.1007/s00415-009-5324-y. Epub 2009 Oct 1.
The success of future neurodegenerative disease (ND) therapies depends partly on accurate antemortem diagnoses. Relatively few prior studies have been performed on large, multicenter-derived datasets to test the accuracy of final clinical ND diagnoses in relation to definitive neuropathological findings. Data were analyzed from the University of Kentucky Alzheimer's Disease Center autopsy series and from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) registry. NACC data are derived from 31 different academic medical centers, each with strong clinical expertise and infrastructure pertaining to NDs. The final clinical diagnoses were compared systematically with subsequent neuropathology diagnoses. Among subjects meeting final inclusion criteria (N = 2,861 for NACC Registry data), the strength of the associations between clinical diagnoses and subsequent ND diagnoses was only moderate. This was particularly true in the case of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB): the sensitivity of clinical diagnoses was quite low (32.1% for pure DLB and 12.1% for Alzheimer's disease (AD + DLB) although specificity was over 95%. AD clinical diagnoses were more accurate (85.0% sensitivity and 51.1% specificity). The accuracy of clinical DLB diagnoses became somewhat lower over the past decade, due apparently to increased "over-calling" the diagnosis in patients with severe cognitive impairment. Furthermore, using visual hallucinations, extrapyramidal signs, and/or fluctuating cognition as part of the clinical criteria for DLB diagnosis was of minimal utility in a group (N = 237) with high prevalence of severe dementia. Our data suggest that further work is needed to refine our ability to identify specific aging-related brain disease mechanisms, especially in DLB.
未来神经退行性疾病(ND)治疗的成功在一定程度上取决于准确的生前诊断。相对较少的先前研究在大型多中心衍生数据集上进行,以测试最终临床 ND 诊断与明确的神经病理学发现之间的准确性。数据分析来自肯塔基大学阿尔茨海默病中心尸检系列和国家阿尔茨海默病协调中心(NACC)登记处。NACC 数据来自 31 个不同的学术医疗中心,每个中心都具有与 ND 相关的强大临床专业知识和基础设施。最终临床诊断与随后的神经病理学诊断进行了系统比较。在符合最终纳入标准的受试者中(NACC 注册数据为 2861 名),临床诊断与随后的 ND 诊断之间的关联强度仅为中度。这在路易体痴呆(DLB)中尤其如此:临床诊断的敏感性相当低(纯 DLB 为 32.1%,阿尔茨海默病(AD+DLB)为 12.1%,尽管特异性超过 95%)。AD 临床诊断更为准确(敏感性为 85.0%,特异性为 51.1%)。过去十年中,DLB 的临床诊断准确性略有下降,这显然是由于在认知严重受损的患者中增加了对该诊断的“过度诊断”。此外,在一组(N=237)严重痴呆患病率较高的患者中,将视觉幻觉、锥体外系体征和/或波动性认知作为 DLB 诊断的临床标准的一部分,其作用微不足道。我们的数据表明,需要进一步努力提高我们识别特定与衰老相关的大脑疾病机制的能力,尤其是在 DLB 中。