Premium
P3‐062: Visual variant of alzheimer's disease in an algerian patient
Author(s) -
Elias Attal,
Nabila Attal,
Ahmed Mahmoud Ait Kaci,
Cherif Abbadi Mohamed
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1016/j.jalz.2011.05.1501
Subject(s) - apraxia , aphasia , atrophy , psychology , medicine , alzheimer's disease , agnosia , dysphagia , dementia , episodic memory , tau protein , neuroscience , disease , pathology , cognition , surgery
ering “probable AD” alone as well as “probable” plus “ possible” AD. The neuropathological diagnosis of AD was defined using multiple combinations of CERAD neuritic plaque density scores and Braak neurofibrillary tangle stages.Results:The sensitivity of the clinical diagnosis of AD ranged from 65% to 87% while specificity ranged from 64% to 78%. Sensitivity was increased with more permissive clinical criteria and specificity was increased with more restrictive criteria while the opposite was true for neuropathological criteria. The highest combined diagnostic performance (sensitivity of 79% and specificity of 71%) was achieved when the clinical diagnosis was defined as including both probable and possible AD and the neuropathological diagnosis was defined as being inclusive of the following two situations: 1) frequent neuritic plaque density with Braak stage III-VI 2) moderate neuritic plaque density with Braak stage V or VI. Conclusions: Agreement between the clinical and neuropathological definitions of AD, based on data from NIA ADC’s, varies depending on the levels of clinical and neuropathological confidence, with sensitivities and specificities ranging between 64% and 87%. The rate of misdiagnosis is critical for many types of research, including the calculation of sample size for clinical trials.