Back

Time's up: Using data-driven phenotype-severity metrics not time to map progression in the dementias

Smith, V.; Schumacher, R.; Ramanan, S.; Bouzigues, A.; Russell, L. L.; Foster, P. H.; Ferry-Bolder, E.; van Swieten, J. C.; Jiskoot, L. C.; Seelaar, H.; Sanchez-Valle, R.; Laforce, R.; Graff, C.; Galimberti, D.; Vandenberghe, R.; de Mendonca, A.; di Fede, G.; Santana, I.; Gerhard, A.; Levin, J.; Nacmias, B.; Otto, M.; Bertoux, M.; Lebouvier, T.; Ducharme, S.; Butler, C. R.; Le Ber, I.; Finger, E.; Tartaglia, M. C.; Masellis, M.; Synofzik, M.; Moreno, F.; Borroni, B.; Rohrer, J. D.; Rowe, J. B.; Lambon Ralph, M. A.

2026-01-30 neurology
10.64898/2026.01.28.26344700 medRxiv
Show abstract

Temporal measures, such as time from diagnosis or symptom onset are often used to track disease severity in neurodegenerative diseases. Due to variations in symptom awareness, clinical presentation timing, diagnostic delays, and disease progression rates, these temporal proxies introduce substantial variance and bias, making it very difficult to map progression clearly and accurately, and to severity-match across contrastive patient groups. To address this challenge, we explored a data-driven approach to derive a transdiagnostic severity metric that is independent of time and, instead, treats temporal metrics as observed, dependent data. We analysed data from the Genetic Frontotemporal Dementia Initiative (GENFI 1 and 2). We entered neuropsychological scores for symptomatic individuals including any visits prior to conversion from at-risk to symptomatic (n = 265, 522 visits) in an unrotated principal component analysis to derive a transdiagnostic phenotype-severity model. A single component emerged (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin = 0.92), explaining 65% of the variance, with all neuropsychological assessments loading highly. This global severity component fitted the data equally well across genetically or clinically defined groups, as well as severity levels. The severity measures validity was supported by a clear relationship with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale, and its stability was confirmed when a much broader range of neuropsychological and behavioural measures were included. Additionally, the severity score accounted for a high portion of the total variance in neuropsychological test scores, substantially more than the low proportion accounted for by standard temporal measures. To derive a time-efficient sub-battery, we demonstrated that three neuropsychological assessments (Digit Symbol, Verbal fluency (letters) and Trail Making Test- Part B were able to explain the majority of unique variance in cognitive severity. Finally, by treating time as an observed dependent variable, we showed that the baseline velocity (change in severity measure over time) varied by genetic group, with progranulin mutation carriers being the fastest. This data-driven approach provides an objective, precise measure of disease severity and progression, and it may shed new light on when clinical heterogeneity reflects distinct subtypes rather than differences in disease stage.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.6%
2
Brain Communications
147 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.6%
3
Alzheimer's & Dementia
143 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.5%
50% of probability mass above
4
Neurobiology of Aging
95 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.1%
5
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.8%
6
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
43 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.6%
7
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.5%
8
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
52 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.2%
9
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 48%
2.2%
10
Neuropathology and Applied Neurobiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.0%
11
Annals of Neurology
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
12
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
13
Neurology
44 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.4%
14
Neurobiology of Disease
134 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
15
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 62%
1.0%
16
npj Parkinson's Disease
89 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
17
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.9%
18
Journal of Neurology
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
19
EMBO Molecular Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
20
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
21
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.8%
22
Translational Psychiatry
219 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
23
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 57%
0.8%
24
Acta Neuropathologica Communications
81 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
25
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
26
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 36%
0.7%
27
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
28
Nature Aging
51 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 28%
0.5%
30
Age and Ageing
27 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%