Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42760345›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neurology2026

Atypical Alzheimer disease: a multi-axis framework toward defining heterogeneity.

Lea T Grinberg, Melissa E Murray

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lea T GrinbergDepartment of Neuroscience, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA. grinberg.lea@mayo.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6809-0618
Melissa E MurrayDepartment of Neuroscience, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7379-2545

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alzheimer disease (AD) is defined biologically by the presence of amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and tau neurofibrillary tangles in the brain; however, these pathologies do not affect all brain regions equally. Typical AD usually presents with memory impairment, whereas atypical forms of AD, including posterior cortical atrophy, logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia, behavioural and dysexecutive AD, and corticobasal syndrome, manifest with prominent non-memory symptoms. Aβ biomarkers usually confirm that AD pathology is present, whereas regional tau, neurodegeneration and dysfunction more closely track the affected network and the presenting symptoms. The atypical variants, which tend to present at a younger age than typical AD, provide human models to study selective vulnerability of neurons and circuits. They also help us to test whether immune-glial, vascular, protein-handling, synaptic or genetic factors shape regional vulnerability and rate of progression beyond total Aβ and tau burden. In this Review, we integrate clinical, neuropathological, imaging, genetic and molecular evidence to describe atypical AD within the broader AD spectrum. We propose a practical multi-axis framework comprising clinical phenotype, AD biological context (AD pathology plus co-pathologies and molecular modifiers), network topography (regional patterns) and tempo (rate of clinical and biomarker progression). This framework could reduce diagnostic mismatches, make cohorts more comparable and support trials that include outcomes tailored to the affected brain networks.

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.