Back

Volumetric Integrity of Frontotemporal and Perisylvian Regions for Predicting Behavioral and Language Impairment in Behavioral FTD: A Structural MRI Study

Zare, A. H.; Kiani, I.; Zeinalzadeh, L.; Taghilou, A.; Mirsepasi, Z.; Aghamollaii, V.

2026-10-05 neurology
10.64898/2026.09.30.26364390 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is clinically defined by progressive changes in personality, executive function, and language, yet the structural neural correlates of symptom severity remain unclear. This study aimed to assess the association between clinical findings and neuroimaging biomarkers. Methods: We included 87 patients with bvFTD. Clinical functioning was covering behavior and language. Spearman rank correlations were used to assess univariate associations, and Bonferroni correction was applied for multiple comparisons. Principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted on regional volumes, and multivariable logistic regression was used to model high behavioral impairment (FBI total [≥]30), adjusting for age, sex, and education. Results: No individual regional volume was significantly correlated with clinical scores after Bonferroni correction (all adjusted p>0.05), and PCA-derived imaging components failed to predict behavioral severity in multivariable models. Age emerged as the only significant predictor (OR=1.11 per year; p=0.009). Model discrimination was modest (AUC=0.735) and did not improve with the inclusion of imaging features (p=0.453 vs. demographics-only model). Conclusions: In this bvFTD cohort, structural volumes of key frontotemporal and perisylvian regions did not predict behavioral or language impairments after correction for multiple comparisons. These findings show the limitations of regional volumetric analysis in isolation and stress the need for network-based, multimodal, and longitudinal approaches.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.