A Case with semantic dementia due to GRN gene mutation

Chunchun CHEN, Feiqi ZHU, Chunyan XU, Guozhen QIU, Qiwen GUO, Jiawen LI

PDF(1516 KB)
  • ISSN 2096-5516 CN 10-1536/R
  • Sponsored: China Association for Alzheimer’s Disease
快速检索
Chinese Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders ›› 2023, Vol. 6 ›› Issue (2) : 136-140. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-5516.2023.02.009
Research Articles

A Case with semantic dementia due to GRN gene mutation

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Objective:To report a case with semantic dementia (SD)due to progranulin (GRN) gene mutation diagnosed by whole exon sequencing. Methods:The case history,neuropsychological assessment,neurological examination,radiological, and genetic findings were summarized.Results:The case is a 57-year-old female ,whose father died due to dementia at the age of 60.He developed at the age of 56 with speech impairment as the first symptom, particularly impaired naming and comprehension,accompanied by memory loss. Brain MRI showed atrophy involving the bilateral temporal lobes ,specially left anterior temporal. By whole exon sequencing.the proband was found with the mutation in exon 2 of the GRN gene.Conclusion:This case is diagnosed as semantic dementia due to GRN gene mutation.

Key words

Primary progressive aphasias / Frontotemporal dementia / Semantic dementia / GRN gene

Cite this article

Download Citations
Chunchun CHEN , Feiqi ZHU , Chunyan XU , Guozhen QIU , Qiwen GUO , Jiawen LI. A Case with semantic dementia due to GRN gene mutation. Chinese Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders. 2023, 6(2): 136-140 https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.2096-5516.2023.02.009
原发性进行性失语(primary progressive aphasias,PPA)是指一组早期以语言障碍为主,而认知障碍、行为障碍或运动症状等随后出现的神经变性疾病[1],由Mesulam等于1982年被首次描述并定义[2] 。根据语言受损的临床表现和萎缩的脑区,原发性进行性失语主要分为三种:非流利型原发进行性失语(non-fluent variant PPA,nfvPPA)、语义型原发进行性失语(semantic variant PPA,svPPA)、少词型原发进行性失语(logopenic variant PPA,lvPPA)[1]。语义型原发性进行性失语又名语义性痴呆(semantic dementia,SD),是一种主要表现为进行性语义功能障碍和不对称性颞叶萎缩的神经系统变性疾病[1]。相关研究报道语义性痴呆的患病率约为1.1/10万例[3]。本文将讨论1例我院确诊的GRN基因突变引起的SD病例,探讨SD的临床特点以及GRN基因突变的机制。

1 对象和方法

1.1 研究对象

本研究的研究对象为 2022年6月深圳市罗湖区人民医院神经内科老年性认知障碍病房收治的 1例语义性痴呆患者。

1.2 资料收集

对患者进行详细的病史询问,收集患者的一般资料和疾病信息,包括发病年龄、首发症状、主要临床特点以及既往的检查资料(广州金域医学检验中心,遗传性痴呆症相关基因检测),并对患者进行完善神经心理测评及影像学(MRI)检查。

2 结果

2.1 临床资料

患者女性,57岁,右利手,以“语言表达不准确1年余”为主诉于2022年6月就诊于本院。患者1年余前无明显诱因开始出现说话词不达意,表达不准确,例如4点30分说成43,把一些量词“一只、一头和一瓶”说错,偶有命名错误,如把“马桶”叫做“洗手间”,伴有找词困难,例如“杯子、苋菜”等要回忆很久才能表达出来,用“这”来表述,经常答非所问,无语言不流利,记忆力稍微减退,性格脾气无明显改变,人际关系良好,无暴饮暴食,目前日常生活能力正常,可以独自外出购物、买菜、做饭菜和打扫卫生。无爱吃奇怪东西,无喜欢吃甜食,无幻觉,无异常行为。曾在外院就诊,诊断不详,服用“多奈哌齐”出现呕吐后停药。起病来,患者精神尚可,饮食正常,失眠10余年,主要表现为易醒,入睡困难,凌晨3-4点钟才能睡觉,夜间睡眠时无手舞足蹈、大声说梦话,心情有时低落,伴心烦,大小便正常,近期体重无明显变化。既往史:近5年时有头晕发作,表现为天旋地转样,发作时不敢活动,发作时自测血压偏高(具体不详);近1年余来经常全身到处疼痛;2022年3月份在外院住院诊断“桥本甲状腺炎”。否认糖尿病病史,否认脑外伤史。家族史:其父亲60岁患痴呆去世,其2个哥哥、1个姐姐和2个弟弟均无痴呆症状。育有1儿子,目前32岁体健。查体:体温:36.7 ℃, 脉搏:75 次/分,呼吸:19次/分,血压:118/72mmHg,神清,言语清晰,听理解下降、找词困难,记忆力稍减退,定向力、计算力正常,双侧瞳孔等大等圆,直径2.5mm,对光反应灵敏,双眼各方向活动正常,未见眼震。双侧额纹、鼻唇沟等深,伸舌居中,示齿口角不歪,四肢肌力5级,肌张力正常,四肢腱反射正常,双侧病理征(-),感觉系统、共济运动正常对称,颈软,脑膜刺激征(-),心肺腹部查体未见明显异常。

2.2 神经心理测评

全套神经心理测评(表1):(1)简明精神状态量表(MMSE):20分;(2)蒙特利尔认知评估基础量表(MoCa-B):11分;(3)记忆与执行筛查量表(MES):53分;(4)AVLT 词语延迟回忆:7分,AVLT词语总记忆:25分;(5)CFT 图形模仿:28分,CFT图形延迟回忆:12.5分;(6)动物流畅性(AFT):无法完成;(7)Boston命名测验(BNT):12分;(8)Stroop色词测验(CWT-C):50分;(9)连线测验(STT-B): 188秒;(10)数字符号转换:58分;(11)数字广度测验:3+2;(12)老年抑郁两边(GDS):5分;(13)日常生活能力量表(ADL): 20分。结论:记忆力、注意力、执行功能相对保留,而涉及语言的部份,如词语流畅性、Boston命名明显下降。语言评估ABC(表2):命名及听理解障碍,单个词的复述保留,但长句子的复述障碍,阅读能力相对保留,计算正常;由于听理解障碍,患者的听写及自发书写能力均明显下降(患者听不明白题目要求)。
Tab.1 Neuropsychological assessments

表1 全套神经心理测评

测验名称 得分 正常值 满分
简明精神状态量表(MMSE) 总分 20 文盲>17 小学>20 初中及以上>24 30
蒙特利尔认知评估基础量表(MoCA-B)总分 11 文盲与小学>19
中学>22 大学>24
30
记忆与执行筛查量表(MES)总分 53 >75 100
AVLT词语延迟回忆 7 >4 12
AVLT词语总记忆 25 >20 60
CFT图形模仿 28 >32 36
CFT图形延迟回忆 12.5 >9 36
动物流畅性(AFT) 无法完成 初中>10 高中>11 大学>12
Boston命名测验(BNT) 12 初中>17 高中>19 大学>20 30
Stroop 色词测验C(正确数) 50 >40 50
连线测验(STT-B) 188 中学<230 大学<210
数字符号转换 58 >29
数字广度测验 3-2
老年抑郁量表(GDS) 4 <5
日常生活能力量表 19 <23 20
Tab. 2 Language ABC assessment

表2 语言ABC评估

检查项目 得分 总分
口语表达 信息量 4 6
流利性 22 27
系列语言 21 21
复述 49 100
命名: 词命名 12 40
反应命名 6 10
列名 3 12
听理解 是/否题 42 60
听辨认 52 90
口头指令 22 80
阅读 视读 10 10
听字辨认 10 10
字画匹配
理解
朗读 20 20
20 20
读指令执行
理解
朗读 15 15
12 15
填空 27 30
书写 姓名地址 5 10
抄写 10 10
听写 14 34
系列书写 20 20
看图书写 6 20
自发书写 1 5

2.3 影像学检查

MRI提示双侧颞叶萎缩,以左侧前颞叶为主,左侧前颞叶灌注降低(图1)。博脑定量磁共振分析提示额颞叶痴呆(frontotemporal dementia,FTD)脑萎缩指数97%,脑萎缩模式与FTD的相似度高于阿尔茨海默病(Alzheimer's disease,AD)。
Fig.1 Cranial MRI of the case
Not: A~E: Both coronal and transverse horizontal scan indicate significant atrophy in the left temporal lobe, mainly in the left anterior temporal lobe (indicated by arrows); F: MRA indicated normal intracranial vessels; G~H: ASL indicated decreased perfusion in the left anterior temporal lobe (indicated by arrows)

图1 患者头颅MRI

Full size|PPT slide

2.4 基因学检查

该患者存在GRN基因第2号外显子c.133dupC(p.Leu45fs)移码变异突变。APOE基因检测为3/3型。

2.5 诊断及治疗

根据上述临床表现及辅助检查结果,本患者确诊为语义性痴呆。患者给予对症治疗:甘露特钠胶囊(450mg,每日2次)改善认知功能以及认知和言语训练。经3个月后门诊随访,语言功能大致同前,情绪及失眠较前明显好转。

3 讨论

语义性痴呆的核心症状是命名障碍和单词理解障碍。虽然命名障碍也存在于PPA的另两种类型以及其他导致失语的神经变性病变中,但在语义性痴呆患者中,与其他相对保留的语言领域相比,命名障碍是最为严重的[1],且复述功能保存较好。单词理解障碍主要是指对低频词语理解障碍,这也是早期伴随着命名障碍出现的唯一症状。本例患者于56岁隐匿起病,以语言障碍为首发症状,命名及听理解障碍较为突出,伴有记忆力下降,其父亲有痴呆病史,影像学主要表现为双侧颞叶萎缩,以左侧前颞叶为主,根据国际PPA研究小组2011年语义性痴呆的诊断标准及我国2022年《额颞叶变性诊治中国专家共识》的诊断标准[1,4],本例患者符合SD的临床诊断。基因检测证实存在GRN基因突变,从基因水平上进一步明确诊断。
PPA是一种具有多种神经病理改变的临床综合征[1]。分子病理学研究资料表明,大部分PPA患者被证实存在tau蛋白阳性、泛素蛋白/TDP43(transactive response DNA binding protein molecular weight 43)阳性的额颞叶变性(frontotemporal lobar degeneration,FTLD)或AD的病理表现[5,6]。同一病理改变可导致不同的PPA类型,而同一PPA类型可能由多个神经病理改变引起的。临床病理学研究通常将nfvPPA与tau蛋白阳性病理改变相关[5],SD与FTLD-TDP43阳性病理改变相关,而lvPPA与AD病理改变相关[7]。所以,从病理改变角度上看,语义性痴呆属于额颞叶变性的一个类型。
FTLD 的发病机制和病因目前尚未明确,但有研究表明约20%的FTLD是由基因突变引起的。FTLD与许多基因突变相关,包括MAPT (microtubule- associated protein tau ) 基因、GRN(progranulin)基因、C9ORF72(chromosome 9 openreading frame 72)基因和较少见的VCP(valosin-containing protein)基因、TARDBP(TAR DNA binding protein)基因、FUS(fused in sarcoma)基因[8]。其中明确基因突变的病例中大部分表现为行为变异型额颞叶痴呆(behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia,bv FTD)[9]。与此相比,SD人群中只有大约5%有家族遗传史,目前已发现基因突变主要为TARDBP、C9ORF72、GRN、VCP等[10]。其中GRN基因是编码颗粒蛋白的基因,它与17号染色体的MAPT基因只有1.7 Mb的着丝粒,这两个不同的基因在同一染色体上彼此非常接近,所以导致相似的表型[8]。目前已知的GRN基因有130个突变,多呈常染色体显性遗传,男女比例接近1:1,最新研究表明女性居多,发病年龄跨度大(25~90岁),平均61岁[11]
相关研究表明,GRN基因突变导致的颗粒蛋白前体(progranulin,PGRN)蛋白水平降低已被证实是家族性FTLD的主要致病因素之一,其特征是在神经元中异常聚集RNA结合蛋白TDP-43[12]。PGRN是由GRN基因编码的一种分泌型糖蛋白[12]。PGRN通常被分解成被称为颗粒蛋白的裂解产物,PGRN和各种颗粒蛋白已被证明可以调节神经元的存活和形态。PGRN可以促进神经元的生长,各种颗粒蛋白对神经元也有不同的作用。除了对神经元生长的影响外,PGRN在炎症反应和溶酶体功能中也有重要作用[8]
在GRN基因突变的患者中,神经变性的部位往往更具局灶性和不对称性[13]。如果起始退化的部位在优势半球的前颞叶,患者的语义命名问题较为突出;如果非优势半球的前颞叶为起始退化的部位,那早期的语义性失语和物体失认症或面孔失认症是主要的表现[8]。GRN基因突变的患者也可出现行为变异型额颞叶痴呆(bv-FTD)和nfvPPA的临床表型,甚至出现一些非典型的AD、皮质基底综合征(corticobasal syndrome ,CBD)的表型,这就给临床的诊断增添了许多难度。随着病程的进展,患者可能会出现帕金森综合征,当顶叶也出现退化的时候,患者就会出现肢体失用症[14]。本例患者以语言障碍为主要临床表现,命名问题较为突出,记忆力、注意力、视空间、执行功能等相对保留,无伴随精神行为异常及肢体运动症状,临床诊断上不支持GRN基因突变导致的其他临床表型。
目前对于语义性痴呆的治疗在临床上存在一定的难度,需要我们进一步实践及研究。甘露特钠为脑-肠轴调控药物,可有效调节肠道菌群、降低脑内炎性因子水平[15]。本例患者予以甘露特钠治疗,随访3个月时发现患者的情绪、睡眠较前得到一定程度的改善,其作用可能也与减轻神经炎症有关。
我们对此病例的研究也存在一些不足:该患者随访的时间有限,对于疾病的进展及演变等均未得知。其次,该患者的兄弟姐妹及子女未同意行基因检测,对该患者家族中基因突变携带者仍未明确。
综上所述,语义性痴呆在临床上的诊断非常有难度,且与原发性进行性失语的其他类型难以鉴别,因此详细的病史采集(包括症状的具体表现、疾病的进展及家族史)、准确的体格检查、神经心理测评、语言功能评估以及影像学检查等可以帮助诊断及鉴别诊断,尽早的生物标志物检测以及基因检测可进一步确诊。若确诊与基因突变相关,应尽可能完善患者的其他家族成员的基因检测,以方便其他家族成员的疾病预测及指导生育。

References

[1]
Gorno-Tempini ML, Hillis AE, Weintraub S, et al. Recommendations for the classification of primary progressive aphasia and its variants[J]. Neurol, 2011, 76(11):1006-1014.
[2]
Mesulam MM. Slowly progressive aphasia without generalized dementia[J]. Ann Neurol, 1982, 11(6):592-598.
Six right-handed patients experienced a slowly progressing aphasic disorder without the additional intellectual and behavioral disturbances of dementia. The symptoms almost universally started in the presenium. The initial difficulty was an anomic aphasia in five of the patients and pure word deafness in the sixth. Continuous and gradual deterioration occurred in the five patients who presented with an anomic aphasia. They eventually experienced additional impairment of reading, writing, and comprehension. In four patients, other areas of comportment were not involved within the 5 to 11 years of follow-up. A more generalized state of dementia may have emerged in the other two patients, but only after 7 years of progressive debilitating aphasia. Neurodiagnostic procedures were consistent with preferential involvement of the left perisylvian region. In one patient, cortical biopsy did not show any pathognomonic change; specifically, no neurofibrillary tangles, amyloid plaques, neuronal inclusions, or gliosis were seen. This condition may constitute a syndrome of relatively focal cerebral degeneration with a predilection for the left perisylvian region.
[3]
郭起浩, 陈科良. 语义性痴呆的研究进展[J]. 重庆医科大学学报, 2017, 42(6):4.
[4]
中华医学会老年医学分会老年神经病学组, 额颞叶变性专家共识撰写组. 额颞叶变性诊治中国专家共识[J]. 中华老年医学杂志, 2022, 41(8):15.
[5]
Josephs KA, Duffy JR, Strand EA, et al. Clinicopathological and imaging correlates of progressive aphasia and apraxia of speech[J]. Digest World Core Med J, 2006, 129(6):1385-1398.
[6]
Mesulam M. The core and halo of primary progressive aphasia and semantic dementia[J]. Ann Neurol, 2003,54.
[7]
Mesulam M, Wicklund A, Johnson N, et al. Alzheimer and frontotemporal pathology in subsets of primary progressive aphasia.[J]. Ann Neurol, 2010, 63(6):709-719.
[8]
Boeve BF, Rosen H. Clinical and Neuroimaging Aspects of Familial Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration Associated with MAPT and GRN Mutations[J]. Adv Exp Med Biol, 2021, 1281:77-92.
Numerous kindreds with familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration have been linked to mutations in microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT) or progranulin (GRN) genes. While there are many similarities in the clinical manifestations and associated neuroimaging findings, there are also distinct differences. In this review, we compare and contrast the demographic/inheritance characteristics, histopathology, pathophysiology, clinical aspects, and key neuroimaging findings between those with MAPT and GRN mutations.
[9]
Wagner M, Lorenz G, Volk AE, et al. Clinico-genetic findings in 509 frontotemporal dementia patients[J]. Molecul psychiat, 2021(10):26.
[10]
王梓铖, 翟伟杰, 魏春晓, 等. VCP基因突变导致的语义性痴呆1例并文献复习[J]. 中风与神经疾病杂志, 2022, 39(11):1032-1034.
[11]
Moore KM, Nicholas J, Grossman M, et al. Age at symptom onset and death and disease duration in genetic frontotemporal dementia: an international retrospective cohort study[J]. 2020, 19(2):145-156.
[12]
Zhang T, Du H, Santos MN, et al. Differential regulation of progranulin derived granulin peptides[J]. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 2021, 17(1):15.
[13]
Whitwell JL, Boeve BF, Weigand SD, et al. Brain atrophy over time in genetic and sporadic frontotemporal dementia: a study of 198 serial magnetic resonance images[J]. Eur J Neurol, 2015, 22(5):745-752.
The aim of our study was to determine the utility of longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements as potential biomarkers in the main genetic variants of frontotemporal dementia (FTD), including microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT) and progranulin (GRN) mutations and C9ORF72 repeat expansions, as well as sporadic FTD.In this longitudinal study, 58 subjects were identified who had at least two MRI and MAPT mutations (n = 21), GRN mutations (n = 11), C9ORF72 repeat expansions (n = 11) or sporadic FTD (n = 15). A total of 198 serial MRI measurements were analyzed. Rates of whole brain atrophy were calculated using the boundary shift integral. Regional rates of atrophy were calculated using tensor-based morphometry. Sample size estimates were calculated.Progressive brain atrophy was observed in all groups, with fastest rates of whole brain atrophy in GRN, followed by sporadic FTD, C9ORF72 and MAPT. All variants showed greatest rates in the frontal and temporal lobes, with parietal lobes also strikingly affected in GRN. Regional rates of atrophy across all lobes were greater in GRN compared to the other groups. C9ORF72 showed greater rates of atrophy in the left cerebellum and right occipital lobe than MAPT, and sporadic FTD showed greater rates in the anterior cingulate than C9ORF72 and MAPT. Sample size estimates were lowest using temporal lobe rates in GRN, ventricular rates in MAPT and C9ORF72, and whole brain rates in sporadic FTD.These data support the utility of using rates of atrophy as outcome measures in future drug trials in FTD and show that different imaging biomarkers may offer advantages in the different variants of FTD.© 2015 EAN.
[14]
Kelley BJ, Haidar W, Boeve BF, et al. Prominent phenotypic variability associated with mutations in Progranulin[J]. Neurob Aging, 2009, 30(5):739-751.
[15]
史璐行, 刘巧玲, 钱雪芬, 等. 甘露特钠联合多奈哌齐治疗轻度阿尔茨海默病的疗效[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2022(19):42.
PDF(1516 KB)

Collection(s)

Case report

1069

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/