A brief history of "Alzheimer disease"

Multiple meanings separated by a common name

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The field of Alzheimer disease (AD) has a nosologic problem: The diagnostic label "Alzheimer disease" has several distinctive meanings. The term probable AD was introduced in 1984 to designate a clinically diagnosed acquired and progressive amnestic dementia for which there was no evidence for another etiology. Probable AD represented a clinicopathologic entity that assumed a specific and sensitive linkage between amnestic dementia and the neuropathology of β-amyloid-containing neuritic plaques and tau-containing neurofibrillary tangles. The clinicopathologic model represented by probable AD was adapted in abbreviated form for population-based studies and general clinical practice, although the uncertainty connoted by "probable" was often overlooked. Representing the growing public awareness of later life cognitive impairment, a vernacular meaning of AD arose out of the clinicopathologic model in which AD represented all dementia not due to another clinically apparent cause. In contrast, by the 1990s, neuropathologists settled on a definition of AD based entirely on a sufficient burden of neuritic plaques and neurofibrillary tangles at postmortem examination, regardless of antemortem clinical status. In the last decade, the availability of fluid and imaging biomarkers that measure β-amyloid and tau abnormalities has enabled antemortem pathobiological diagnoses, highlighting the divide between the clinicopathologic model, the vernacular usage, and the pathobiological models. Each definition has value. However, the meanings of AD as defined by each of these models are not interchangeable. The pathobiological one is the only one that is unambiguous.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1053-1059
Number of pages7
JournalNeurology
Volume92
Issue number22
DOIs
StatePublished - May 28 2019

Fingerprint

Names
Alzheimer Disease
Dementia
Neurofibrillary Tangles
Amyloid Plaques
Amyloid
General Practice
Uncertainty
Autopsy
Biomarkers
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

A brief history of "Alzheimer disease" : Multiple meanings separated by a common name. / Knopman, David S; Petersen, Ronald Carl; Jack, Clifford R Jr.

In: Neurology, Vol. 92, No. 22, 28.05.2019, p. 1053-1059.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{cd43595fce0a40838067c360f393151c,
title = "A brief history of {"}Alzheimer disease{"}: Multiple meanings separated by a common name",
abstract = "The field of Alzheimer disease (AD) has a nosologic problem: The diagnostic label {"}Alzheimer disease{"} has several distinctive meanings. The term probable AD was introduced in 1984 to designate a clinically diagnosed acquired and progressive amnestic dementia for which there was no evidence for another etiology. Probable AD represented a clinicopathologic entity that assumed a specific and sensitive linkage between amnestic dementia and the neuropathology of β-amyloid-containing neuritic plaques and tau-containing neurofibrillary tangles. The clinicopathologic model represented by probable AD was adapted in abbreviated form for population-based studies and general clinical practice, although the uncertainty connoted by {"}probable{"} was often overlooked. Representing the growing public awareness of later life cognitive impairment, a vernacular meaning of AD arose out of the clinicopathologic model in which AD represented all dementia not due to another clinically apparent cause. In contrast, by the 1990s, neuropathologists settled on a definition of AD based entirely on a sufficient burden of neuritic plaques and neurofibrillary tangles at postmortem examination, regardless of antemortem clinical status. In the last decade, the availability of fluid and imaging biomarkers that measure β-amyloid and tau abnormalities has enabled antemortem pathobiological diagnoses, highlighting the divide between the clinicopathologic model, the vernacular usage, and the pathobiological models. Each definition has value. However, the meanings of AD as defined by each of these models are not interchangeable. The pathobiological one is the only one that is unambiguous.",
author = "Knopman, {David S} and Petersen, {Ronald Carl} and Jack, {Clifford R Jr.}",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "28",
doi = "10.1212/WNL.0000000000007583",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "92",
pages = "1053--1059",
journal = "Neurology",
issn = "0028-3878",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "22",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A brief history of "Alzheimer disease"

T2 - Multiple meanings separated by a common name

AU - Knopman, David S

AU - Petersen, Ronald Carl

AU - Jack, Clifford R Jr.

PY - 2019/5/28

Y1 - 2019/5/28

N2 - The field of Alzheimer disease (AD) has a nosologic problem: The diagnostic label "Alzheimer disease" has several distinctive meanings. The term probable AD was introduced in 1984 to designate a clinically diagnosed acquired and progressive amnestic dementia for which there was no evidence for another etiology. Probable AD represented a clinicopathologic entity that assumed a specific and sensitive linkage between amnestic dementia and the neuropathology of β-amyloid-containing neuritic plaques and tau-containing neurofibrillary tangles. The clinicopathologic model represented by probable AD was adapted in abbreviated form for population-based studies and general clinical practice, although the uncertainty connoted by "probable" was often overlooked. Representing the growing public awareness of later life cognitive impairment, a vernacular meaning of AD arose out of the clinicopathologic model in which AD represented all dementia not due to another clinically apparent cause. In contrast, by the 1990s, neuropathologists settled on a definition of AD based entirely on a sufficient burden of neuritic plaques and neurofibrillary tangles at postmortem examination, regardless of antemortem clinical status. In the last decade, the availability of fluid and imaging biomarkers that measure β-amyloid and tau abnormalities has enabled antemortem pathobiological diagnoses, highlighting the divide between the clinicopathologic model, the vernacular usage, and the pathobiological models. Each definition has value. However, the meanings of AD as defined by each of these models are not interchangeable. The pathobiological one is the only one that is unambiguous.

AB - The field of Alzheimer disease (AD) has a nosologic problem: The diagnostic label "Alzheimer disease" has several distinctive meanings. The term probable AD was introduced in 1984 to designate a clinically diagnosed acquired and progressive amnestic dementia for which there was no evidence for another etiology. Probable AD represented a clinicopathologic entity that assumed a specific and sensitive linkage between amnestic dementia and the neuropathology of β-amyloid-containing neuritic plaques and tau-containing neurofibrillary tangles. The clinicopathologic model represented by probable AD was adapted in abbreviated form for population-based studies and general clinical practice, although the uncertainty connoted by "probable" was often overlooked. Representing the growing public awareness of later life cognitive impairment, a vernacular meaning of AD arose out of the clinicopathologic model in which AD represented all dementia not due to another clinically apparent cause. In contrast, by the 1990s, neuropathologists settled on a definition of AD based entirely on a sufficient burden of neuritic plaques and neurofibrillary tangles at postmortem examination, regardless of antemortem clinical status. In the last decade, the availability of fluid and imaging biomarkers that measure β-amyloid and tau abnormalities has enabled antemortem pathobiological diagnoses, highlighting the divide between the clinicopathologic model, the vernacular usage, and the pathobiological models. Each definition has value. However, the meanings of AD as defined by each of these models are not interchangeable. The pathobiological one is the only one that is unambiguous.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066966618&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85066966618&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007583

DO - 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007583

M3 - Review article

VL - 92

SP - 1053

EP - 1059

JO - Neurology

JF - Neurology

SN - 0028-3878

IS - 22

ER -