Clinical Recognition of Frontotemporal Dementia with Right Temporal Predominance; Consensus Recommendations of the International Working Group

1.1. RATL and knowledge loss for people

Face recognition deficits are prominently observed in patients with predominant RATL atrophy, and extensively studied across various research groups (Table 1). While commonly labeled as “prosopagnosia,” recent literature employing rigorous face-to-face assessments indicates that RATL-related impairments differ significantly from those related to posterior cortical areas primarily involved in basic face perception. Instead, these deficits are associated with a multimodal loss of person-specific knowledge, encompassing recognition difficulties with voices, biographical details, and faces, collectively termed as “person-specific knowledge” or “person-based semantics”^8,17,25–40. These studies have shown that patients with RATL atrophy often demonstrate intact basic face perception and discrimination skills, but struggle to identify people from photographs or recognize them by voice. They therefore also exhibit deficits in assessing familiarity, semantic associations and providing semantic information. Some studies have reported that knowledge of infrequent acquaintances or famous public figures deteriorates earlier than that of close family members, analogous to the early loss of less familiar/frequent words in the left hemisphere counterpart, svPPA³⁴. Several authors have highlighted that semantic knowledge about people can be spared when individuals are provided with names or verbal definitions rather than pictures^{29,32,34–36,41}. Moreover, comparative studies of RATL versus LATL atrophy in semantic dementia reveal distinct patterns of impairment. A strong anatomical correlation has been found between face-to-name and voice-to-name matching performance and the right temporal lobe but not the left⁴², and patients with predominant LATL atrophy identify faces from pictures (visual task) better than their names (verbal task), whereas those with RATL atrophy show the opposite pattern^28,30,31, suggesting the crucial role of LATL in verbal semantics, and RATL in non-verbal processing. These laterality effects are likely to be a matter of degree, rather than binary distinctions⁴³ and may dissipate as disease progression leads to bilateral ATL damage. In a detailed case study, the patient was also unable to describe her feelings about the ‘recognized’ person, as an aspect of semantic loss, beyond difficulties in providing biographical information. In addition, she used general semantic knowledge to identify people. For example, she would promptly recognize her grandson in his mechanic’s overall but not in ordinary clothes. Similarly, she would identify the local priest only when he wore his black cassock during church services³⁵. These examples highlight the complexity of patients’ adaptive mechanisms, underscoring the difficulties in capturing such symptoms unless they are systematically inquired about and objectively tested. Existing face-to-face tests are mainly available for Western populations’ references images and delivered in English. Cultural adaptation of those tests is essential, both in language and in the cultural familiarity of test materials. Additionally, current validated tools assess person identity via static pictures. Novel ecologically valid, and culturally sensitive tools that combine visual and auditory information are warranted (Table 2).

1.2. RATL and knowledge loss for other living beings

Object recognition deficits, naming, and word-finding difficulties are other common symptoms reported by several groups^6,10,22,44. However, studies using standardized tests indicate that these deficits are category-specific. Beyond person-based knowledge, research has shown that patients with RATL atrophy experience knowledge loss for living beings, leading to recognition, naming, and word-finding difficulties^35,45–48. Comparative studies have demonstrated that while left-predominant SD affects both animate and inanimate words equally due to language involvement, right-predominant SD, with greater language sparing, continues to impair other semantic aspects related to animals⁴⁵. Other studies using multi-modal stimuli reported poor knowledge of sensory attributes and consistently greater impairment for living things^48,49. A more specialized study documented difficulties in recognizing birds by their calls in a bird expert with RATL atrophy⁴⁷, while another reported a deficit in mushroom identification in an experienced mushroom gatherer with RATL atrophy³⁵. This evidence highlights the need for more detailed cognitive assessments to identify such deficits in patients with RATL atrophy. Better test designs and prospective multicultural studies are needed to elucidate whether the impairment is confined to socioemotionally relevant living beings or extends to all living entities, and to assess if this symptom is an early marker of the syndrome. Additionally, given the reported similar deficits in patients with predominant LATL atrophy⁵⁰, prospective comparative studies are warranted to elucidate whether these deficits are part of a broader conceptual system underpinned by a bilaterally-implemented, functionally-unitary semantic hub in the ATLs. Currently, a few experimental tasks are available, but there is no validated tool for clinical use. During tool development and/or validation, cultural sensitivities should be carefully considered (Table 2).

1.3. RATL and knowledge loss for landmarks, monuments and places

Deficits regarding landmarks and monuments have been reported by several groups, despite the use of heterogeneous terminologies for the ensuing phenomena, including ‘getting lost,’ ‘topographagnosia,’ ‘wayfinding difficulties,’ ‘knowledge loss for places’ or ‘semantic deficit for landmarks’^{10–12,22,25,26,34,38}. Although most studies rely on clinical observations, some groups have assessed this deficit using quantitative tests, reflecting knowledge loss for landmarks and monuments^25,26,34,38. One detailed case study provided deeper insights into the nature of the deficit in RATL degeneration²⁶. In this study, the patient’s wayfinding abilities in a familiar environment (i.e., his hometown) were preserved despite an inability to recognize familiar and famous buildings, monuments, and landmarks. Wayfinding was achieved through heavy reliance on written indications (e.g., names of restaurants and streets), preservation of a pre-existing cognitive map of the familiar environment, normal executive functions necessary to plan the execution of a given trajectory, and an over-reliance on processing local features. This distinguishes the deficit from navigational impairment following damage to the medial temporal lobe. Naming (4/20) and identifying (6/20) famous monuments, as well as familiarity, were significantly impaired when presented with photographs. In contrast, upon verbal presentation of the names of these famous monuments, he correctly identified 17/20 of them. Although not systematically tested initially, the patient was also unable to recognize pictures of famous places he had visited and pictures of famous monuments in his hometown²⁶. Considering the high prevalence of place orientation deficits and getting lost in Alzheimer’s disease (AD), improved terminologies and standardized assessments are crucial for differentiation and accurate diagnosis of FTD patients with RATL predominance. It is crucial to investigate in multicultural cohorts whether these modalities manifest at early stages. Although some experimental tasks are currently available, there is a lack of validated clinical tools. It is crucial to consider cultural sensitivities during the development and validation processes (Table 2).

1.4. RATL and knowledge loss for flavors and odors

Clinical studies based on retrospective analyses of medical records frequently identify this deficit^{4,28,35,47,51,52}. Although this domain has not been as extensively studied by employing objective tests, as ‘person knowledge,’ substantial evidence indicates that patients with predominant RATL atrophy experience semantic knowledge loss for flavors and odors, tested with gustatory and olfactory stimuli, despite retaining intact taste and smell perception abilities^14,17,53. One study reported impaired identification of food elements and the inability to associate them with semantically related content (e.g., edible versus inedible items), despite recognizing them when provided with their names³⁵. Another study described a patient who noted his favorite food smelled strange, and the slightest food odor became intolerable, described as “foul,” “rotten,” or “like sewage,” leading to significant weight loss due to reduced food intake¹⁴. Several authors suggest that “the strong food preference” observed in RATL neurodegeneration may be due to semantic degradation for foodstuffs, narrowing their preferences^14,53. However, it remains debated whether chemosensory alterations (taste, smell) represent a pure semantic deficit or a broader deficit in hedonic valuation²⁴. It is necessary to objectively test whether deficits related to taste and smell stimuli constitute a multimodal non-verbal semantic deficit and if so, whether these deficits are category-specific (e.g., living beings, social context-related items) in larger samples. Furthermore, although such deficits have been reported as early symptoms of the syndrome, prospective multicultural comparative studies are needed to elucidate the contribution of LATL atrophy and to determine the impact of the culture in food appreciation, as well as the onset and distinctiveness of these symptoms. At present, a few experimental tasks exist, but no tools have been validated for clinical application. Attention to cultural nuances is essential throughout development and validation (Table 2).

1.5. RATL and knowledge loss for sounds

Studies focusing on RATL degeneration and sounds have primarily examined human voices, as discussed above (see section 1.1.). However, data using detailed assessments that include otorhinolaryngological examinations and tests for perception, identification, discrimination, familiarity, semantic association, and naming have revealed knowledge loss for accents, songs, vocal tones, and melodies as well as prosody, in patients with RATL neurodegeneration^39,54–58. Neuroimaging studies have found significant correlations between famous music recognition deficits and right temporal pole atrophy⁵⁶, and between atrophy in the right supra-marginal and superior temporal gyri and deficits in detecting violated sounds and melodies. Additionally, atrophy in the bilateral anterior temporal poles and left medial temporal structures was related to deficits in environmental sound recognition⁵⁵. Furthermore, post-hoc analysis in this study showed that the right predominant SD group had significant impairments in both melody and environmental sound tasks, scoring lower for living superordinate categories (animals, humans), although this was not statistically significant⁵⁵. However, given the limited amount of evidence, this domain still awaits better-designed studies to determine its category specificity, clinical prevalence in the early stages of the syndrome, and distinctiveness from LATL neurodegeneration. The field has some experimental tasks but lacks clinically validated tools. Cultural considerations should be integral to the development and validation phases (Table 2).

1.6. RATL and knowledge loss for bodily sensations

Another ubiquitous symptom in the RATL literature is altered responses of patients to sensations, mostly termed as “somatization”, “hypochondria”, or “alexisomia”^10,59. The lack of knowledge related to interoceptive stimuli and their interpretation, leading to misidentification of normal bodily sensations, has been suggested as the underlying mechanism^18,59. Patients exhibit a variety of complaints of behaviors related to this impairment, including unidentified pains, aches, numbness, itching, tinnitus, discomforts; feelings of warmth or cold; abnormal sensations in the bladder, bowel, thorax, abdomen, head and stomach; inappropriate reactions to own bodily odors, hunger, regurgitation, borborygmi, running nose, sweating, and fatigue. Normal interceptive signals may be considered as indicators of disease, which may be reported as hypochondriasis, illness anxiety disorder, or Cotard syndrome^10,18,59.

Recent studies using cardiac monitoring during emotional stimuli have shown significantly impaired interoception in predominant RATL neurodegeneration compared to those with predominant LATL atrophy⁶⁰. The authors suggested that impaired emotion recognition in the RATL syndrome is driven by inaccurate internal monitoring⁶⁰. Conversely, another group found preserved cardiac reactivity during emotional stimuli in ATL syndromes, whereas cardiac reactivity was attenuated in groups with predominant fronto-insular atrophy (bvFTD and nonfluent PPA)⁶¹. Another group suggested that a decline in the parasympathetic nervous system may contribute to reductions in interpersonal engagement and gregariousness/extraversion, personality changes that are especially common in the RATL syndrome⁶². Nevertheless, these hypotheses need to be tested in larger cohorts to elucidate the neural mechanisms and determine whether they are early characteristic symptoms of the syndrome and whether the bodily sensation of emotion dissipates before the cognitive recognition of the emotion, or vice versa⁶³. As discussed in the previous sections, a consistent theme emerges: while there are a few experimental tasks available, the absence of validated tools for clinical use remains a significant gap. Moving forward, it is imperative that cultural sensitivities are incorporated into every stage of tool development and validation (Table 2).

1.7. RATL and knowledge loss for emotions, social information and paralinguistic cues

Emotion recognition deficit is one of the most frequently reported symptoms in patients with RATL atrophy. Various emotion recognition tasks (see Table 1) have been used globally, confirming these deficits across different studies^{22,60,64–67}. Comparative studies have shown that patients with right temporal predominance at early stages perform worse on facial emotion selection tasks compared to other FTD subtypes, including bvFTD and svPPA^22,67. Recent work has shown that comprehending facial cues is not limited to emotions. A study using video-based dynamic stimuli (including facial expressions, body gestures, and vocal cues) demonstrated a sarcasm detection deficit in patients with predominant RATL atrophy, who considered the actors’ statements literally without reading paralinguistic cues. This deficit was worse in RATL patients than in their left temporal and frontal FTD counterparts²². A PET study indicated that FTLD patients with right superior ATL hypometabolism were significantly more impaired on social concepts (e.g., ‘polite,’ ‘stingy’) than on animal function concepts (e.g., ‘trainable,’ ‘nutritious’)⁶⁸. A case report assessing knowledge of social information using a standardized test of general knowledge of public events and figures, found that the patient’s scores were significantly impaired in the visual identification part of the semantic test (a picture of a famous public event, such as the explosion of the atomic bomb, the destruction of the Berlin Wall, etc.,) while performance was within the normal range for the verbal part of the test⁶⁹. Another study using a social interaction vocabulary test found a correlation between bilateral ATL atrophy and lower performances on this test. Notably, in this test, the definition of the social interaction was provided verbally, and participants were asked to match the word with a picture⁷⁰. These studies support the argument that while the RATL is crucial for non-verbal comprehension of socioemotional concepts (paralinguistic, visual, vocal), the LATL supports verbal comprehension^71,72. Existing face-to-face tests are mainly available for Western, English-speaking populations. During tool development and/or validation, cultural sensitivities and ecological validity should be considered (Table 2).

2.1. RATL and altered emotional expression

Beyond emotion recognition deficits, several groups have reported other social cognition deficits such as inappropriate emotional expression (facial and prosodic) or theory of mind (ToM) (mentalizing) impairments in patients with RATL atrophy. This is often described as a ‘lack of empathy’ by caregivers and clinicians, ^{13,16,20,22,73–76}. A recent study found a restricted prosodic range in this group compared to svPPA and healthy controls, which was associated with a reduction in empathy, as observed by caregivers¹³.

Another study showed that the subgroup with RATL atrophy exhibited a unique phenotype, characterized by globally reduced facial reactivity and aberrant coupling of muscle reactivity to facial expression identification. This group showed impaired emotion recognition, but their facial mimics were not correlated with emotion identification performances, unlike other FTD subgroups and healthy controls, and were described as ‘poker-faced (no reaction)’ or ‘caricatures’ of normal emotional reactions (over/inappropriate reaction)^16,74. Similarly, another group reported that compared with healthy older adults, bvFTD patients showed an overall dampening of physiological responses, whereas SD patients exhibited abnormal facial expressiveness discordant with the emotional content of the stimuli⁷³. The right fusiform gyrus has been implicated in the processes of facial and emotional recognition of laughter, explaining inconsistent shared laughter experiences in patients with RATL⁷⁵. Additionally, ToM deficits on ToM tasks have been associated with RATL regions, a recent study assessing a large number of patients with focal RATL atrophy at early stages using dynamic face-to-face tests showed that patients with predominant RATL atrophy displayed lower scores in the emotional ToM task, unlike patients with predominant frontal atrophy who exhibited worse performance in the cognitive ToM task²². It has been suggested that if an individual can no longer understand the semantic meaning of emotional information, the associated response appears compromised^71,73. However, it remains to be tested whether these altered emotional reactions are purely due to knowledge loss for emotions or whether alterations in other brain networks following neurodegeneration in RATL lead to the abnormal behavioral response. Given the lack of evidence elucidating the neural mechanisms, the IWG recommends the term “altered emotional expression”. Although it is still relatively broad and does not fully reflect impaired neural domains, it refers to the objective observation of the external expression of emotion, rather than attempting to infer the patient’s internal emotional state. Additionally, it is more specific than current terms such as ‘lack of empathy’, and clearly describes the clinical phenomenon. Next to neural mechanisms, it is crucial to investigate whether these modalities manifest at early stages. The same gap persists regarding the lack of culturally sensitive validated tests for clinical use (Table 2).

2.2. RATL and altered social reaction

Previous work has shown that knowledge loss for socioemotional information as well as people, living beings, landmarks, flavors, odors, sounds and bodily sensations was mainly reported as ‘disinhibition’ by many clinicians, as the clinical outcome was socially inappropriate behavior^4,71 (i.e., drinking a bottle of soap, confusing it with food, see more real life examples in Table 2). This has been widely discussed in several theoretical models, suggesting that conceptual knowledge of social constructs and socially relevant cues are represented in the ATLs^65,71,72,77, and an anatomical model for the umbrella term “disinhibition” was offered suggesting that ATL related disinhibition is associated with loss of knowledge of social norms and expectations rather than a problem with control or inhibition per se⁷⁸. However, no large sample size study has yet unveiled the neural components of inappropriate social behavior in RATL using objective measurements. It remains unknown whether there are other components causing such reactions beyond semantic deficits. Given the lack of evidence elucidating the neural mechanisms, the IWG recommends the term “altered social reaction,” which is still relatively broad and does not fully reflect impaired neural domains. Yet it is more specific and accurate than current terms such as ‘disinhibition’, and clearly describes the clinical phenomenon without implying the unknown mechanism. Currently, no tasks are available for clinical use.

2.3. RATL and altered motivation for social interactions

Apathy is another highly reported symptom in RATL cohorts, mainly measured with the neuropsychiatric inventory apathy subscale^10,79–83. However, the characteristics of ‘lack of motivation’ in the RATL syndrome differ from classic cognitive apathy, which typically involves losing motivation for almost all daily tasks and novelty seeking. Instead, patients exhibit a strong shift from socially motivated activities to narrowed solitary activities for which they show heightened motivation^4,23 (see section 3). Moreover, in the early stages, patients maintain their non-social daily life activities such as showering, cooking, driving etc., but they may express inertia towards social activities⁴. Available studies using quantitative assessments are limited, however, one study using the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale and the motivation subscale of the Cambridge Behavior Inventory indicated a unique role for right temporal lobe structures in modulating anhedonia in SD. The study suggested that degeneration of predominantly right-hemisphere structures deleteriously impacts the capacity to experience pleasure in SD, leading to a lack of motivation⁸⁴. However, no distinction regarding social vs solitary activities has been made in this study. Moreover, patients with semantic and behavioral deficits violate the assumptions implicit in self-report questionnaires and Likert scales⁸⁵. Although there are no objective measurements to assess such behaviors, clinical studies indicate that the motivation for social interactions is often misplaced rather than completely absent. Given the lack of evidence elucidating the neural mechanisms, the IWG recommends the term “Altered motivation for social interactions,” which is still relatively broad and does not fully reflect impaired neural domains. Yet it is more specific than current complex terms such as ‘apathy’, and clearly describes the clinical phenomenon without implying a mechanism. Investigating whether these modalities manifest at early stages and identifying the underlying neural mechanisms is crucial. Beyond informant-based surveys for broad symptoms such as pleasure, apathy, motivation scales, more specific, objective, culturally sensitive face-to-face tests targeting neural mechanisms are warranted (Table 2).

3.1. RATL and hyperfocus on specific interests

Perhaps the least understood symptom group of the syndrome is mental rigidity, preoccupations, ritualistic and obsessive-compulsive behavior, despite their high prevalence (78% in early stages) in the IWG dataset⁴. A total of 505 specific examples were reported, including time and schedule (21%), food (17%), puzzles/sudoku/computer games (12%), global warming/recycling/saving gas, water, electricity (8%), sports (6%), walking/cycling/driving (6%), hoarding/collecting (5%), health-related (4%), shopping/ordering (3%), colors (3%), clothes (3%), religion (3%), writing (2%), art (music/drawing/painting/sculpture) (2%), saving money/parsimony (2%), cleaning (1%), clock-watching (1%), checking/controlling (1%), gardening (1%), and other (4%). Similar examples have been described by several authors displayed in Table 1. These activities are part of patients’ daily lives, and they exhibit heightened motivation and attention spans toward such actions. There is no objective test available to assess such behavior; however, caregiver reports and clinical observations suggest a unique nature, indicating that patients spend considerable time and attention, exhibiting hyperfocus on certain activities and specific interests. Additionally, unlike individuals with psychiatrically diagnosed obsessive-compulsive disorder, patients with RATL atrophy exhibit less anxiety, self-criticism, or insight. Thus, the IWG advocates for improved terminologies instead of mental rigidity, preoccupations, ritualistic or obsessive-compulsive behavior to better phenotype the distinct characteristics of these symptoms. Future studies are warranted to identify the neural underpinnings of such deficits, to interrogate the thought process behind these typical behaviors, and objective tests are needed to examine these symptoms in daily clinical practice.

3.2. RATL and altered hedonic valuation and personal preferences

Alongside specific interests, alterations in personal preferences such as food choices, colors, clothes, and aesthetic tastes have been noted in international data⁴. A group of authors has suggested that the clinical syndrome associated with RATL atrophy may partly involve disturbances in reward processing, shifting hedonic values away from people towards inanimate objects^23,86. Similar arguments have highlighted that semantic knowledge of social interactions is influenced by the hedonic evaluation system, emphasizing the close connection between ATLs and the medial orbitofrontal regions^70,77. Several clinical scientists claimed semantic loss as the reason of strong personal preference, particularly for food^14,17,53. However, to what extent semantic deficits contribute to personal preferences and whether valence processing (i.e., recognizing the pleasant or unpleasant nature of emotions) also depends on semantic knowledge remains to be determined through objective evaluations (Table 2).

4.1. RATL and apparent memory deficits

To date, episodic, semantic and autobiographical memory deficits have been documented in RATL with discrepant frequencies by several groups^{10,11,87–89}, and the occurrence of amnestic presentations (episodic memory deficits), remains a controversial topic in the field. Although episodic memory disturbances (i.e., forgetting appointments) have been reported in multiple studies^{4,10,88,90–93}, these were objectified with episodic memory tests in relatively fewer studies^4,10,76,94. The latter showed impairments in standard episodic memory tests, particularly in those using visual stimuli rather than verbal stimuli. When comparing dementia subtypes, worse semantic memory performances in FTD with RATL atrophy were found compared to AD and worse episodic memory performances in AD compared to FTD with RATL atrophy^10,76,94. In IWG’s recent study, chart reviews showed that 67% of patients had reported memory problems, whereas objective abnormalities varied between 21% and 87% across eight different episodic memory tests⁴.

Studies using detailed memory tests have identified category specific memory deficits^25,95. In those studies, memory for famous people and social events were selectively disturbed. Current neuroscientific evidence suggests that due to the categorization problem, patients with semantic deficits demonstrate a “over-generalization” tendency and exhibit learning difficulties⁹⁶, and semantic processing may underlie forms of episodic and autobiographical memory by providing schemas and meaning for remembering the past, even for imagining the future⁸⁹. However, those publications include patients with either predominant LATL or bilateral temporal atrophy. Given the advent of disease-modifying therapies for AD, the IWG calls for more focused studies that aim to disentangle the neural and molecular underpinnings of memory impairment in RATL syndrome.

4.2. RATL and psychiatric symptoms

Besides those core symptoms, affective dysregulation, anxiety/panic, delusions/ hallucinations, have also been reported with lower frequencies in previous publications^10,88. Although, former literature suggested depression as a distinctive symptom^10,88, our joint data also showed cases with mania and fluctuating mood⁴. A case with RATL atrophy whose severe claustrophobia had disappeared 7 years after onset of her first symptoms has been reported⁹⁷. Another case with mania responded very well to symptomatic treatment ⁹⁸. On the other hand, another group has drawn attention to increased potential risk for suicidal behavior in this disease group, as they found preoccupations around depressive thoughts and suicidal ideas⁹⁹. All reported psychiatric symptoms in the literature rely on clinical observations and caregiver declarations, lacking objective assessments to better understand the neural mechanisms causing such problems. However, RATL neurodegeneration should be considered in cases with late-onset psychiatric problems, and other RATL-specific symptoms listed in this paper should be further assessed to detect potential underlying neurodegeneration.

4.3. RATL and language problems

As discussed in the previous sections and exemplified in Table 2, the loss of knowledge across several categories were reported as language problems by many caregivers and clinicians. In the IWG dataset, 70% of patients were reported to have naming and word-finding difficulties, although available cognitive test scores revealed that nearly all patients who underwent cognitive assessment exhibited severe visual and person-specific semantic deficits while performances on general naming were relatively better⁴.

Additionally, comparative studies have shown that patients with predominant RATL atrophy performed better on verbal semantics and fluency tests compared to svPPA, however worse than bvFTD and healthy controls^10,22. Therefore, further work is required to understand the role of RATL in language functions, particularly in naming and elucidate the contributions of LATL atrophy which is commonly observed in patients with RATL predominant atrophy.

4.4. RATL and spared functions

It should be noted that almost all papers have reported no symptoms related to visuospatial and attention functions^{4,6,8–10,22,88,100}. Patients have either performed within normal expectations or showed mild impairment on standardized tests. Visuospatial functions, in particular, have been highlighted as well-preserved, a finding confirmed by standardized test assessments^{4,6,8–11,22,88}. Comparative studies showed although executive and attention functions may not be normal, they are less severely affected compared to AD, bvFTD, and svPPA^10,22. And in RATL, there are better verbal semantic skills, less surface dyslexia in English; or fewer accent and tone regularization errors in other languages compared to svPPA^10,22,79, and better episodic memory performances compared to AD^10,76,94.

Contributors

HU and YP established the international working group (IWG) and the study was designed by them with the contributions of the IWG. KY, MM and HU conducted the systematic review. HU collected and integrated the qualitative data (expert recommendations) generated by IWG. HU wrote the manuscript. HU designed the figures and tables. All authors contributed to the interpretation of the results and provided a critical review and approval of the manuscript.

Role of the funding source

The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. The corresponding author had full access to all study data and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

Declaration of interests

Authors declare no competing interest.

*Investigators of the IWG

Agustin Ibanez³¹, Alan Lerner³², Alexander Frizell Santillo¹², Alexandre Morin³³, Alma Ghirelli³⁴, Andrea Arighi²⁴, Arabella Bouzigues²⁸, Bedia Samancı⁹, Bradley F. Boeve²⁷, Bruce L. Miller², Carmela Tartaglia³⁵, Caroline Dallaire Theroux³⁶, Christopher Kobylecki¹¹, Daniel Ohm³⁷, Daniela Galimberti^24,25, David Foxe⁶, David Irwin³⁷, David Perry², Diana Matallana Eslava³⁸, Edoardo Gioele Spinelli³⁴, Elisa Canu³⁴, Elisabet Englund¹³, Emily Rogalski²⁵, Emma Devenney⁶, Emma Rhodes³⁷, Eun Joo Kim³⁹, Federica Agosta³⁴, Fiona Kumfor⁶, Florence Pasquier⁵, Floor Duits¹, Francesco Di Lorenzo⁴⁰, Frederik Barkhof¹, Gail Robinson⁴¹, Giorgio Fumagalli^7,8, Giuseppe Piga⁴², Gregory Kuchcinski⁵, Hakan Gurvit⁹, Halle Quang⁶, Harro Seelaar⁴³, Howie Rosen², Hulya Ulugut^1,2, Ignacio Illan Gala¹⁰, James Rowe³⁰, Jan Van den Stock¹⁶, Janine Diehl Schmid^15,22, Jason D. Warren²⁸, Jennifer C. Thompson¹¹, Jennifer L. Whitwell²⁶, Jessica Hazelton⁶, Jonathan D. Rohrer²⁸, Julie Fields²⁵, Julie Snowden¹¹, Julien Lagarde⁴⁴, Jwala Narayanan⁴⁵, Katherine P. Rankin², Katya Rascovsky³⁷, Keith A. Josephs²⁸, Kristina Horne⁶, Kyan Younes^2,3, Leonardo Cruz de Souza²⁰, Leonel T. Takada²¹, Lina Riedl¹⁵, Lize Jiskoot⁴³, Lucy Russell²⁸, Luca Sacchi²⁴, Manuela Pintus²⁴, Maria Landqvist Waldo¹⁴, Marilu Gorno Tempini^2,29, Mario F. Mendez^46,47, Marsel Mesulam²⁵, Massimo Filippi³⁴, Mathieu Vandenbulcke¹⁶, Matthew Jones¹¹, Matthew Rouse³⁰, Masud Husain⁴⁸, Matthias L. Schroeter⁴⁹, Maud Tastevin¹⁸, Maxime Bertoux⁵, Maxime Montembeault⁴, Mira Didic⁵⁰, Muireann Irish⁶, Murat Emre⁹, Na-Yeon Jung³⁹, Oliver Piguet⁶, Oskar Hansson¹², Paulo Caramelli²⁰, Peter Pressman¹⁹, Raffaella Migliaccio⁴⁴, Ratnavalli Ellajosyula⁴⁵, Rik Ossenkoppele¹, Rik Vandenberghe¹⁷, Robert Jr Laforce¹⁸, Samantha Loi⁵¹, Sandra Weintraub²⁵, Shalom Henderson³⁰, Sid Ramanan³⁰, Sian Thompson³⁰, Simon Ducharme⁴, So Young Moon⁵², Sun Min Lee⁵², Thibaud Lebouvier⁵, Toji Miyagawa²⁷, Virginia E. Sturm², Welmoed Krudop¹, Yolande Pijnenburg¹

¹Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Department of Neurology, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, ²Memory and Aging Center, Department of Neurology, UCSF Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco, USA, ³Stanford Neuroscience Health Center, Department of Neurology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, USA, ⁴Department of Psychiatry, Douglas Mental Health University Institute, McGill University Health Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, ⁵Lille Neuroscience & Cognition U1172, Univ. Lille, Inserm, CHU Lille, LiCEND & Labex DistALZ, Lille, France., ⁶Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, ⁷Department of Neurology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy, ⁸Università degli Studi di Trento | UNITN · CIMEC - Center for Mind/Brain Sciences, ⁹Department of Neurology, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey, ¹⁰Sant Pau Memory Unit, Department of Neurology, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Centro de Investigación en Red-Enfermedades Neurodegenerativas (CIBERNED) Madrid, Spain, ¹¹Cerebral Function Unit, Greater Manchester Neuroscience Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK; Division of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK, ¹²Clinical Memory Research Unit, Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund/Malmö, Sweden, ¹³Division of Pathology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, SE-221 85, Sweden, ¹⁴Division of Clinical Sciences Helsingborg, Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, ¹⁵School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany, ¹⁶Neuropsychiatry, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, ¹⁷Neurology Service, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; and Laboratory for Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, ¹⁸Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Département des Sciences Neurologiques, Laval University, Quebec City (QC), Canada, ¹⁹University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Behavioral Neurology Section, Department of Neurology, USA, ²⁰Behavioral and Cognitive Neurology Research Group, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, ²¹Cognitive and Behavioral Unit, Hospital das Clinicas, Department of Neurology, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil, ²²Kbo-Inn-Salzach-Klinikum, Clinical Center for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatic Medicine, Geriatrics and Neurology, Wasserburg/Inn, Germany, ²³Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy, ²⁴Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy, ²⁵Mesulam Center for Cognitive Neurology and Alzheimer’s Disease Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, IL, Chicago, USA, ²⁶Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA, ²⁷Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA, ²⁸Dementia Research Centre, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, London, UK, ²⁹Dyslexia Center, University of California, San Francisco, USA, ³⁰Department of Clinical Neurosciences and Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust and Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, ³¹Latin American Brain Health Institute (BrainLat) at Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez (UAI), ³²Department of Neurology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH,USA, ³³ Department of Neurology Rouen University Hospital, France, ³⁴Neurology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy, ³⁵Department of Neurology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada, ³⁶Clinique Interdisciplinaire de Mémoire (CIME), Laval University, Quebec, Canada, ³⁷Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center, Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States ³⁸Department of Neurology, Javeriana University, Bogotá, Colombia, ³⁹Pusan National University School of Medicine and Medical Research Institute 179 Gudeok-ro, Seo-gu, Busan, Korea, ⁴⁰Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Unit, IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy, ⁴¹Brain & Mind Center, University of Sydney, Camperdown NSW 2050, Australia, ⁴²ICM Paris Brain Institute, Paris France ⁴³Department of Neurology, Erasmus MC - University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, ⁴⁴Department of Neurology of Memory and Language, GHU Paris Psychiatrie & Neurosciences, Hôpital Sainte Anne, Paris, France ⁴⁵Department of Neurology, Manipal Hospital India, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India, ⁴⁶Department of Neurology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; ⁴⁷Department of Psychiatry, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. ⁴⁸Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK, ⁴⁹Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Germany ⁵⁰Department of Neurology, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France, ⁵¹Academic Unit for Psychiatry of Old Age, St. Vincent’s Health, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Australia, Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, ⁵²Ajou University, Suwon, 443–721, South Korea