Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2022 Jan 17;37(1):104-116. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acab022.
To investigate the differential ability of the "Test Relaties Abstracte Concepten" (TRACE), a Dutch test for abstract semantic knowledge, in frontotemporal dementia (FTD).
The TRACE was administered in patients with behavioral variant FTD (bvFTD; n = 16), nonfluent variant (nfvPPA; n = 10), logopenic variant (lvPPA; n = 10), and semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA; n = 9), and controls (n = 59). We examined group differences, performed correlational analyses with other neuropsychological tests and investigated discriminative ability. We compared the TRACE with a semantic association test for concrete stimuli (SAT).
All patient groups, except nfvPPA, performed worse on the TRACE than controls (p < .01). svPPA patients performed worse than the other patient groups (p < .05). The TRACE discriminated well between patient groups, except nfvPPA, versus controls (all p < .01) and between svPPA versus other patient groups with high sensitivity (75-100%) and specificity (86%-92%). In bvFTD and nfvPPA the TRACE correlated with language tests (ρ > 0.6), whereas in svPPA the concrete task correlated (ρ ≥ 0.75) with language tests. Patients with bvFTD, nfvPPA and lvPPA performed lower on the TRACE than the SAT (p < .05), whereas patients with svPPA were equally impaired on both tasks (p = .2).
We demonstrated impaired abstract semantic knowledge in patients with bvFTD, lvPPA, and svPPA, but not nfvPPA, with svPPA patients performing worse than the other subtypes. The TRACE was a good classifier between each patient group versus controls and between svPPA versus other patient groups. This highlights the value of incorporating semantic tests with abstract stimuli into standard neuropsychological assessment for early differential diagnosis of FTD subtypes.
探究“Test Relaties Abstracte Concepten”(TRACE)在额颞叶痴呆(FTD)中的鉴别能力,TRACE 是一种用于评估抽象语义知识的荷兰测试。
我们对行为变异型额颞叶痴呆(bvFTD;n=16)、非流利型变异型(nfvPPA;n=10)、语义流畅性障碍型(lvPPA;n=10)和语义变异型原发性进行性失语(svPPA;n=9)患者,以及对照组(n=59)进行了 TRACE 测试。我们分析了组间差异,与其他神经心理学测试进行了相关性分析,并探讨了鉴别能力。我们将 TRACE 与用于评估具体刺激的语义联想测试(SAT)进行了比较。
除 nfvPPA 外,所有患者组的 TRACE 测试得分均明显低于对照组(p<0.01)。svPPA 患者的得分明显低于其他患者组(p<0.05)。TRACE 能够很好地区分患者组与对照组(除 nfvPPA 外,所有 p<0.01)以及 svPPA 与其他患者组(所有 p<0.01),具有较高的敏感性(75%-100%)和特异性(86%-92%)。在 bvFTD 和 nfvPPA 中,TRACE 与语言测试呈高度相关(ρ>0.6),而在 svPPA 中,具体任务与语言测试呈强相关(ρ≥0.75)。与 SAT 相比,bvFTD、nfvPPA 和 lvPPA 患者的 TRACE 测试得分更低(p<0.05),而 svPPA 患者在两项任务中的表现相当(p=0.2)。
我们证明了 bvFTD、lvPPA 和 svPPA 患者存在抽象语义知识障碍,但 nfvPPA 患者无此障碍,且 svPPA 患者的表现比其他亚型更差。TRACE 可很好地区分每个患者组与对照组之间,以及 svPPA 与其他患者组之间的差异。这凸显了在标准神经心理学评估中纳入具有抽象刺激的语义测试,对 FTD 亚型进行早期鉴别诊断的价值。