↓ Skip to main content

Distinct clinical and pathological characteristics of frontotemporal dementia associated with C9ORF72 mutations

Overview of attention for article published in Brain, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
479 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
417 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Distinct clinical and pathological characteristics of frontotemporal dementia associated with C9ORF72 mutations
Published in
Brain, February 2012
DOI 10.1093/brain/awr355
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie S. Snowden, Sara Rollinson, Jennifer C. Thompson, Jennifer M. Harris, Cheryl L. Stopford, Anna M. T. Richardson, Matthew Jones, Alex Gerhard, Yvonne S. Davidson, Andrew Robinson, Linda Gibbons, Quan Hu, Daniel DuPlessis, David Neary, David M. A. Mann, Stuart M. Pickering-Brown

Abstract

The identification of a hexanucleotide repeat expansion in the C9ORF72 gene as the cause of chromosome 9-linked frontotemporal dementia and motor neuron disease offers the opportunity for greater understanding of the relationship between these disorders and other clinical forms of frontotemporal lobar degeneration. In this study, we screened a cohort of 398 patients with frontotemporal dementia, progressive non-fluent aphasia, semantic dementia or mixture of these syndromes for mutations in the C9ORF72 gene. Motor neuron disease was present in 55 patients (14%). We identified 32 patients with C9ORF72 mutations, representing 8% of the cohort. The patients' clinical phenotype at presentation varied: nine patients had frontotemporal dementia with motor neuron disease, 19 had frontotemporal dementia alone, one had mixed semantic dementia with frontal features and three had progressive non-fluent aphasia. There was, as expected, a significant association between C9ORF72 mutations and presence of motor neuron disease. Nevertheless, 46 patients, including 22 familial, had motor neuron disease but no mutation in C9ORF72. Thirty-eight per cent of the patients with C9ORF72 mutations presented with psychosis, with a further 28% exhibiting paranoid, deluded or irrational thinking, whereas <4% of non-mutation bearers presented similarly. The presence of psychosis dramatically increased the odds that patients carried the mutation. Mutation bearers showed a low incidence of motor stereotypies, and relatively high incidence of complex repetitive behaviours, largely linked to patients' delusions. They also showed a lower incidence of acquired sweet food preference than patients without C9ORF72 mutations. Post-mortem pathology in five patients revealed transactive response DNA-binding protein 43 pathology, type A in one patient and type B in three. However, one patient had corticobasal degeneration pathology. The findings indicate that C9ORF72 mutations cause some but not all cases of frontotemporal dementia with motor neuron disease. Other mutations remain to be discovered. C9ORF72 mutations are associated with variable clinical presentations and pathology. Nevertheless, the findings highlight a powerful association between C9ORF72 mutations and psychosis and suggest that the behavioural characteristics of patients with C9ORF72 mutations are qualitatively distinct. Mutations in the C9ORF72 gene may be a major cause not only of frontotemporal dementia with motor neuron disease but also of late onset psychosis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 417 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
Unknown 407 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 82 20%
Researcher 77 18%
Student > Bachelor 42 10%
Student > Master 37 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 33 8%
Other 80 19%
Unknown 66 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 111 27%
Neuroscience 86 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 10%
Psychology 39 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 5%
Other 30 7%
Unknown 91 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2019.
All research outputs
#8,759,452
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Brain
#5,259
of 7,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,869
of 257,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain
#57
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.9. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 257,018 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.