Diagnostic properties of the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) in Huntington's disease.
Huntington’s disease
cognitive screening
diagnostics
dysexecutive
frontal assessment battery
psychometrics
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
30
08
2022
accepted:
11
11
2022
entrez:
19
12
2022
pubmed:
20
12
2022
medline:
20
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study aimed at assessing the diagnostic properties of the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) as to its capability to (1) discriminate healthy controls (HCs) from patients with Huntington's disease (HD) and (2) identify cognitive impairment in this population. Thirty-eight consecutive HD patients were compared to 73 HCs on the FAB. Patients further underwent the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS). Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were run to assess both intrinsic-i.e., sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp), and post-test diagnostics, positive and negative predictive values (PPV; NPV) and likelihood ratios (LR The FAB and UHDRS-II were completed by 100 and 89.5% of patients, respectively. The FAB showed optimal case-control discrimination accuracy (AUC = 0.86-0.88) and diagnostic properties (Se = 0.68-0.74; Sp = 0.88-0.9; PPV = 0.74-0.8; NPV = 0.84-0.87; LR In HD patients, the FAB is highly feasible for cognitive screening aims, being also featured by optimal intrinsic/post-test diagnostics within both case-control and case-finding settings.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
This study aimed at assessing the diagnostic properties of the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) as to its capability to (1) discriminate healthy controls (HCs) from patients with Huntington's disease (HD) and (2) identify cognitive impairment in this population.
Materials
UNASSIGNED
Thirty-eight consecutive HD patients were compared to 73 HCs on the FAB. Patients further underwent the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS). Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were run to assess both intrinsic-i.e., sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp), and post-test diagnostics, positive and negative predictive values (PPV; NPV) and likelihood ratios (LR
Results
UNASSIGNED
The FAB and UHDRS-II were completed by 100 and 89.5% of patients, respectively. The FAB showed optimal case-control discrimination accuracy (AUC = 0.86-0.88) and diagnostic properties (Se = 0.68-0.74; Sp = 0.88-0.9; PPV = 0.74-0.8; NPV = 0.84-0.87; LR
Discussion
UNASSIGNED
In HD patients, the FAB is highly feasible for cognitive screening aims, being also featured by optimal intrinsic/post-test diagnostics within both case-control and case-finding settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36533005
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1031871
pmc: PMC9748548
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1031871Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Solca, Aiello, Migliore, Torre, Carelli, Ferrucci, Priori, Verde, Ticozzi, Maffi, Ceccarelli, Squitieri, Silani, Ciammola and Poletti.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
VS received compensation for consulting services and/or speaking activities from AveXis, Cytokinetics, Italfarmaco, Liquidweb S.r.l., and Novartis Pharma AG, receives or has received research supports from the Italian Ministry of Health, AriSLA, and E-Rare Joint Transnational Call. He is in the Editorial Board of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration, European Neurology, American Journal of Neurodegenerative Diseases. BP and LC received compensation for consulting services and/or speaking activities from Liquidweb S.r.l. NT received compensation for consulting services from Amylyx Pharmaceuticals and Zambon Biotech SA. FS received compensation for consulting services and/or speaking activities from La Hoffman-Roche, Novartis, PTC Therapeutics, Wave Life Science, Prilenia.
Références
Restor Dent Endod. 2013 Feb;38(1):52-4
pubmed: 23495371
Handb Clin Neurol. 2017;144:227-244
pubmed: 28947120
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2022 Feb;34(2):375-382
pubmed: 34313961
Neurology. 2000 Dec 12;55(11):1621-6
pubmed: 11113214
Mov Disord. 2014 Apr 15;29(5):673-83
pubmed: 24757115
Neurology. 2021 May 11;96(19):e2395-e2406
pubmed: 33766994
BMC Bioinformatics. 2011 Mar 17;12:77
pubmed: 21414208
Neurodegener Dis Manag. 2015;5(2):155-64
pubmed: 25894879
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2022 May;34(5):1021-1026
pubmed: 34981429
Neurol Sci. 2022 Feb;43(2):979-984
pubmed: 34184168
Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener. 2016 Oct - Nov;17(7-8):489-498
pubmed: 27219526
CNS Spectr. 2022 Feb;27(1):27-45
pubmed: 33023702
Mov Disord. 1996 Mar;11(2):136-42
pubmed: 8684382
Neurol Sci. 2021 Dec;42(12):4997-5006
pubmed: 33728549
Mov Disord. 2018 Feb;33(2):187-195
pubmed: 29278291
Am J Med Genet A. 2018 Apr;176(4):842-861
pubmed: 29218782
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2017 Nov 1;32(7):876-887
pubmed: 28961886
Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2011 Oct;11(5):474-83
pubmed: 21861097
Neurology. 1979 Jan;29(1):1-3
pubmed: 154626
J Neurol Sci. 2020 Jan 15;408:116523
pubmed: 31678902
J Neurol. 2009 Nov;256(11):1809-15
pubmed: 19536583
Neurol Sci. 2005 Jun;26(2):108-16
pubmed: 15995827
Mov Disord. 2014 Sep 15;29(11):1335-41
pubmed: 25164527