Utility of the Japanese version of the Clinical Dementia Rating® plus National Alzheimer's Coordinating Centre Behaviour and Language Domains for sporadic cases of frontotemporal dementia in Japan
Daiki Taomoto
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorShunsuke Sato
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Department of Psychiatry, Esaka Hospital, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Hideki Kanemoto
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Correspondence:
Dr Hideki Kanemoto, MD, PhD, Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, D3 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan. E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorMaki Suzuki
Department of Behavioural Neurology and Neuropsychiatry, United Graduate School of Child Development, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorNatsuho Hirakawa
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorAkihiro Takasaki
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorMiu Akimoto
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorYuto Satake
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorFuyuki Koizumi
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorKenji Yoshiyama
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorRei Takahashi
Brain Function Centre, Nippon Life Hospital, Osaka, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorKazue Shigenobu
Department of Behavioural Neurology and Neuropsychiatry, United Graduate School of Child Development, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
Department of Psychiatry, Asakayama General Hospital, Sakai, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorMamoru Hashimoto
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Department of Neuropsychiatry, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorToji Miyagawa
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Search for more papers by this authorBradley Boeve
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Search for more papers by this authorDavid Knopman
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Search for more papers by this authorEtsuro Mori
Department of Behavioural Neurology and Neuropsychiatry, United Graduate School of Child Development, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
Brain Function Centre, Nippon Life Hospital, Osaka, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorManabu Ikeda
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Brain Function Centre, Nippon Life Hospital, Osaka, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorDaiki Taomoto
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorShunsuke Sato
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Department of Psychiatry, Esaka Hospital, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Hideki Kanemoto
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Correspondence:
Dr Hideki Kanemoto, MD, PhD, Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, D3 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan. E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorMaki Suzuki
Department of Behavioural Neurology and Neuropsychiatry, United Graduate School of Child Development, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorNatsuho Hirakawa
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorAkihiro Takasaki
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorMiu Akimoto
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorYuto Satake
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorFuyuki Koizumi
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorKenji Yoshiyama
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorRei Takahashi
Brain Function Centre, Nippon Life Hospital, Osaka, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorKazue Shigenobu
Department of Behavioural Neurology and Neuropsychiatry, United Graduate School of Child Development, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
Department of Psychiatry, Asakayama General Hospital, Sakai, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorMamoru Hashimoto
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Department of Neuropsychiatry, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorToji Miyagawa
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Search for more papers by this authorBradley Boeve
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Search for more papers by this authorDavid Knopman
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Search for more papers by this authorEtsuro Mori
Department of Behavioural Neurology and Neuropsychiatry, United Graduate School of Child Development, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
Brain Function Centre, Nippon Life Hospital, Osaka, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorManabu Ikeda
Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Japan
Brain Function Centre, Nippon Life Hospital, Osaka, Japan
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Background
We aimed to validate the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR®) dementia staging instrument plus the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Centre Behaviour and Language Domains (CDR® plus NACC FTLD) for use in clinical settings in Japan and in the Japanese language.
Methods
This prospective observational study enrolled 29 patients with frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and 21 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia from the Departments of Psychiatry at Osaka University Hospital and Asakayama General Hospital and the Brain Function Centre at Nippon Life Hospital. CDR® plus NACC FTLD, CDR®, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Western Aphasia Battery (WAB), Neuropsychiatric Inventory-plus (NPI-plus), Stereotypy Rating Inventory (SRI), and frontal behavioural symptom scores obtained from items of NPI-plus and SRI, were conducted to assess inter- and intra-rater reliability, validity, and responsiveness. We performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to evaluate the discriminating power of the Behaviour/Comportment/Personality (BEHAV) and Language (LANG) domains of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD and the MEMORY domain of the CDR® in patients AD dementia and FTD.
Results
The CDR® plus NACC FTLD showed good inter- and intra-rater reliabilities. In patients with FTD, the BEHAV domain of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD was significantly correlated with all clinical measures except for the SRI total score, while the LANG domain of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD was significantly correlated with the MMSE and the WAB-Aphasia quotient. In addition, the CDR® plus NACC FTLD sum of boxes significantly changed after 6 months and after 1 year. ROC curve analysis showed that the BEHAV and LANG domains of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD distinguished between patients with AD dementia and FTD better than the MEMORY domain of the CDR®.
Conclusions
This study validated the Japanese version of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD with good reliability, validity, and responsiveness.
Open Research
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article material; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Supporting Information
| Filename | Description |
|---|---|
| psyg13072-sup-0001-TableS1.docxWord 2007 document , 16.2 KB | Table S1. Back-translation version of the Japanese version of the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR)® plus National Alzheimer's Coordinating Centre Behaviour and Language Domains (NACC FTLD). |
Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
REFERENCES
- 1Gorno-Tempini ML, Hillis AE, Weintraub S et al. Classification of primary progressive aphasia and its variants. Neurology 2011; 76: 1006–1014. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31821103e6.
- 2Neary D, Snowden JS, Gustafson L et al. Frontotemporal lobar degeneration: a consensus on clinical diagnostic criteria. Neurology 1998; 51: 1546–1554. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.51.6.1546.
- 3Rascovsky K, Hodges JR, Knopman D et al. Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia. Brain 2011; 134: 2456–2477. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awr179.
- 4Morris JC. The clinical dementia rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology 1993; 43: 2412–2414. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.43.11.2412-a.
- 5Knopman DS, Weintraub S, Pankratz VS. Language and behavior domains enhance the value of the clinical dementia rating scale. Alzheimers Dement 2011; 7: 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2010.12.006.
- 6Knopman DS, Kramer JH, Boeve BF et al. Development of methodology for conducting clinical trials in frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Brain 2008; 131: 2957–2968. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awn234.
- 7Lima M, Tábuas-Pereira M, Durães J et al. Portuguese version of the CDR plus NACC FTLD: validation studies. Alzheimers Dement (Amst) 2022; 14: e12355. https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12355.
- 8Russo G, Russo MJ, Buyatti D et al. Utility of the Spanish version of the FTLD-modified CDR in the diagnosis and staging in frontotemporal lobar degeneration. J Neurol Sci 2014; 344: 63–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2014.06.024.
- 9Borroni B, Agosti C, Premi E et al. The FTLD-modified clinical dementia rating scale is a reliable tool for defining disease severity in frontotemporal lobar degeneration: evidence from a brain SPECT study. Eur J Neurol 2010; 17: 703–707. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2009.02911.x.
- 10Miyagawa T, Brushaber D, Syrjanen J et al. Use of the CDR® plus NACC FTLD in mild FTLD: data from the ARTFL/LEFFTDS consortium. Alzheimers Dement 2020; 16: 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2019.05.013.
- 11Fukuhara R, Ghosh A, Fuh JL et al. Family history of frontotemporal lobar degeneration in Asia – an international multi-center research. Int Psychogeriatr 2014; 26: 1967–1971. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610214000635.
- 12Moore KM, Nicholas J, Grossman M et al. Age at symptom onset and death and disease duration in genetic frontotemporal dementia: an international retrospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2020; 19: 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30394-1.
- 13Boeve BF, Graff-Radford NR. Cognitive and behavioral features of c9FTD/ALS. Alzheimers Res Ther 2012; 4: 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/alzrt132.
- 14Snowden JS, Rollinson S, Thompson JC et al. Distinct clinical and pathological characteristics of frontotemporal dementia associated with C9ORF72 mutations. Brain 2012; 135: 693–708. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awr355.
- 15Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42: 377–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010.
- 16McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement 2011; 7: 263–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.005.
- 17Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res 2010; 19: 539–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8.
- 18Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 737–745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006.
- 19Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RWJG, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res 2012; 21: 651–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9960-1.
- 20O'Bryant SE, Lacritz LH, Hall J et al. Validation of the new interpretive guidelines for the clinical dementia rating scale sum of boxes score in the national Alzheimer's coordinating center database. Arch Neurol 2010; 67: 746–749. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneurol.2010.115.
- 21Miyagawa T, Brushaber D, Syrjanen J et al. Utility of the global CDR® plus NACC FTLD rating and development of scoring rules: data from the ARTFL/LEFFTDS consortium. Alzheimers Dement 2020; 16: 106–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12033.
- 22Wild D, Grove A, Martin M et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health 2005; 8: 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x.
- 23Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12: 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6.
- 24Kertesz A. The Western Aphasia Battery. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1982.
- 25WAB Apahsia Test Construction Committee. The Japanese version of the Western Aphasia Battery. Tokyo: Igakusyoin, 1986.
- 26Cummings JL. The neuropsychiatric inventory: assessing psychopathology in dementia patients. Neurology 1997; 48: S10–S16. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.48.5_suppl_6.10s.
- 27Mori E, Ikeda M, Kosaka K, Donepezil-DLB Study Investigators. Donepezil for dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Neurol 2012; 72: 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.23557.
- 28Shigenobu K, Ikeda M, Fukuhara R et al. The stereotypy rating inventory for frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Psychiatry Res 2002; 110: 175–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-1781(02)00094-x.
- 29Cosseddu M, Benussi A, Gazzina S et al. Progression of behavioural disturbances in frontotemporal dementia: a longitudinal observational study. Eur J Neurol 2020; 27: 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.14071.
- 30Rosli R, Tan MP, Gray WK, Subramanian P, Chin AV. Cognitive assessment tools in Asia: a systematic review. Int Psychogeriatr 2016; 28: 189–210. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610215001635.
- 31Kaufer DI, Cummings JL, Ketchel P et al. Validation of the NPI-Q, a brief clinical form of the neuropsychiatric inventory. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2000; 12: 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1176/jnp.12.2.233.
- 32Kazui H, Yoshiyama K, Kanemoto H et al. Differences of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in disease severity in four major dementias. PloS One 2016; 11: e0161092. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161092.
- 33Ortiz KZ, De Lira JO, Minett TSC, Bertolucci PHF. Language impairment in the moderate stage of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2021; 79: 283–289. https://doi.org/10.1590/0004-282X-ANP-2020-0123.
- 34Kertesz A, Nadkarni N, Davidson W, Thomas AW. The frontal behavioral inventory in the differential diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2000; 6: 460–468. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355617700644041.
- 35Kertesz A, Davidson W, Fox H. Frontal behavioral inventory: diagnostic criteria for frontal lobe dementia. Can J Neurol Sci 1997; 24: 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0317167100021053.
- 36Mioshi E, Flanagan E, Knopman D. Detecting clinical change with the CDR-FTLD: differences between FTLD and AD dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2017; 32: 977–982. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.4556.
- 37Dubois B, Feldman HH, Jacova C et al. Advancing research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease: the IWG-2 criteria. Lancet Neurol 2014; 13: 614–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70090-0.
