How golden is the gold standard of neuropathology in dementia?

Current Alzheimer's disease (AD) criteria state that a definite diagnosis can only be made by postmortem examination. The neuropathological confirmation is often referred to as the “gold standard.” In this article, we review what constitutes a gold standard and how the neuropathological examination of AD lives up to that standard. We conclude that there is no evidence for this notion because results between different laboratories differ to an important extent, especially when the clinical picture is in doubt, for example, when the dementia is mild. As an alternative, we propose to abandon thinking in standards and value neuropathology as any other biomarker, and to strive to use and integrate multiple sources of information to make the diagnosis of AD in all its complexity.

[1]  Carol Brayne,et al.  Age, neuropathology, and dementia. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  M. Esiri,et al.  Pro: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis? , 2010, Alzheimer's Research & Therapy.

[3]  K. Rockwood Con: Can biomarkers be gold standards in Alzheimer's disease? , 2010, Alzheimer's Research & Therapy.

[4]  W. M. van der Flier,et al.  A worldwide multicentre comparison of assays for cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease , 2009, Annals of clinical biochemistry.

[5]  Marshall Godwin,et al.  Health measurement scales , 1991 .

[6]  K. Jellinger Con: Can neuropathology really confirm the exact diagnosis? , 2010, Alzheimer's Research & Therapy.

[7]  Andrew King,et al.  Assessment of beta-amyloid deposits in human brain: a study of the BrainNet Europe Consortium. , 2009, Acta neuropathologica.

[8]  Keith A. Johnson,et al.  Pro: Can biomarkers be gold standards in Alzheimer's disease? , 2010, Alzheimer's Research & Therapy.

[9]  L. White Brain lesions at autopsy in older Japanese-American men as related to cognitive impairment and dementia in the final years of life: a summary report from the Honolulu-Asia aging study. , 2009, Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD.

[10]  Ian G. McKeith,et al.  Pathological correlates of late-onset dementia in a multicentre, community-based population in England and Wales , 2001, The Lancet.

[11]  Susan M Resnick,et al.  In vivo fibrillar beta-amyloid detected using [11C]PiB positron emission tomography and neuropathologic assessment in older adults. , 2011, Archives of neurology.

[12]  J. Price,et al.  Interlaboratory Histopathologic Assessment of Alzheimer Neuropathology: Different Methodologies Yield Comparable Diagnostic Results , 1993, Alzheimer disease and associated disorders.

[13]  B. Crain,et al.  Interlaboratory Comparison of Neuropathology Assessments in Alzheimer's Disease: A Study of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD) , 1994, Journal of neuropathology and experimental neurology.

[14]  K. Jellinger,et al.  Interrater reliability in the neuropathologic diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease , 1992, Neurology.

[15]  M. Weiner,et al.  Cerebrospinal fluid and plasma biomarkers in Alzheimer disease , 2010, Nature Reviews Neurology.

[16]  W. Schlote,et al.  Rating of the lesions in senile dementia of the Alzheimer type: concordance between laboratories A European multicenter study under the auspices of EURAGE , 1990, Journal of the Neurological Sciences.

[17]  M. Folstein,et al.  Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: Report of the NINCDS—ADRDA Work Group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer's Disease , 2011, Neurology.

[18]  G. B. Frisoni,et al.  The dynamics of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort , 2010, Neurobiology of Aging.

[19]  H. Braak,et al.  Staging of Alzheimer-type pathology: an interrater-intrarater study. , 1997, Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders.

[20]  M. Folstein,et al.  Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease , 1984, Neurology.