4.6 Article

Diagnostic accuracy of progressive supranuclear palsy in the society for progressive supranuclear palsy brain bank

Journal

MOVEMENT DISORDERS
Volume 18, Issue 9, Pages 1018-1026

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/mds.10488

Keywords

PSP; tremor; VSO; APOE4; H1 haplotype

Funding

  1. NIA NIH HHS [AG17216, AG03949, AG16574, AG14449] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [NS40256] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Diagnostic accuracy has been addressed previously for Parkinson's disease in a brain bank collection, but accuracy of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) has not been addressed in a similar setting. Clinical and genetic features of pathologically confirmed cases of PSP were compared with misdiagnosed cases to determine ways to improve diagnostic accuracy. Medical records were reviewed for 180 cases sent to the Society of Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Brain Bank that had standardized neuropathologic evaluations as well as determination of apolipoprotein E and tau genotypes. Of the 180 cases studied, 137 had PSP and 43 had other pathologic diagnoses. Corticobasal degeneration (CBD), multiple system atrophy (MSA), and diffuse Lewy body disease (DLBD) accounted for 70% of the misdiagnosed cases. History of tremor, psychosis, dementia, and asymmetric findings were more frequent in misdiagnosed cases. The frequency of HI tau haplotype (93 vs. 80%) and H1H1 genotype (86 vs. 66%) were significantly greater and APOE epsilon4 carrier state was significantly less (17 vs. 41%) in PSP compared with misdiagnosed cases. Pathologic evaluation of clinically diagnosed PSP remains important for definitive diagnosis, and CBD, MSA, and DLBD are the disorders most likely to be misdiagnosed as PSP. Tremor, psychosis, early dementia, asymmetric findings, absence of HI haplotype, and presence of APOE epsilon4 should raise questions about a diagnosis of PSP. (C) 2003 Movement Disorder Society.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available