ライフサイエンスコーパス: semantic variant

1 mporo-parietal junction in patients with the semantic variant.

2 the uncinate fasciculus of patients with the semantic variant.

3 lexical access was less impaired than in the semantic variant.

4 luding logopenic, non-fluent/agrammatic, and semantic variants.

5 of the sample into agrammatic, logopenic and semantic variants.

6 ia (10 with behavioural variant, 11 with the semantic variant and 10 with the non-fluent variant), 28

7 tia, right-temporal frontotemporal dementia, semantic variant and non-fluent variant primary progress

8 emporal components of the dorsal pathways in semantic variant, and in the temporoparietal component o

9 ioural variant, anterior insula and caudate; semantic variant, anterior temporal cortex; non-fluent v

10 Patients with semantic variant aphasia did not overestimate functionin

11 ally unclassifiable patients showed that the semantic variant can be preceded by a prodromal stage of

12 In contrast, patients with the semantic variant exhibited normal rate and very few spee

13 Although the semantic variant has a clear neuroanatomical profile, th

14 c variant (n = 12, age = 71 +/- 8 years) and semantic variant (n = 13, age = 65 +/- 7 years) using ma

15 The semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is

16 l dementia (BVFTD), the nonfluent variant or semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (PPA), u

17 The semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (svPPA)

18 The semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (svPPA)

19 TRODUCTION: Semantic dementia, including the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (svPPA),

20 variant frontotemporal dementia (rtFTD), (3) semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (svPPA),

21 ique clinical model offered by patients with semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (svPPA).

22 variant frontotemporal dementia, 10 had the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia and 10 h

23 the anatomical basis for distinguishing the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia from the

24 ype C cases are commonly associated with the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia or behav

25 or is more common in patients with bvFTD and semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia than in

26 verlaps with concept: emotion recognition in semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia', by Ber

27 Patients with the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia, also kn

28 otemporal dementia (bvFTD), 89 patients with semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia, and 30

29 ) with bvFTD, 24 of 89 patients (27.0%) with semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia, and 6 o

30 western Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia, n = 7;

31 tion in semantic dementia, also known as the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia, remains

32 ant frontotemporal dementia, non-fluent, and semantic variants of primary progressive aphasia (PPA),

33 studies have compared certain subtypes (e.g. semantic variants) or have focused on a specific cogniti

34 nisotropy and radial and mean diffusivities; semantic variant patients had severe changes in all metr

35 bvFTD), 7 non-fluent variant PPA (nfvPPA), 6 semantic variant PPA (svPPA) and 25 patients with subjec

36 relate with distinct underlying pathologies: semantic variant PPA (svPPA) with transactive response D

37 sentation of word meaning in a discussion of semantic variant PPA, grammatical comprehension and expr

38 atic variant primary progressive aphasia and semantic variant PPA.

39 nic variant primary progressive aphasia than semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (all P < 0.

40 avioural variant frontotemporal dementia and semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (also calle

41 t primary progressive aphasia (nfvPPA n=36), semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA n=25

42 Thirty behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD), 13 semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA), 14

43 anterior temporal lobe (ATL): patients with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA), a

44 frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), eight with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA), fi

45 has been considered a right-sided variant of semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA).

46 variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) and semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA).

47 rd deviation) age 64.8 (6.8) years], 12 with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia [four femal

48 showed that the seed region derived from the semantic variant primary progressive aphasia analysis wa

49 We asked 15 patients with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia and 57 pati

50 havioural variant frontotemporal dementia or semantic variant primary progressive aphasia and a struc

51 Both semantic variant primary progressive aphasia and Alzheim

52 We found that both semantic variant primary progressive aphasia and Alzheim

53 We conclude that both semantic variant primary progressive aphasia and Alzheim

54 o controls in the temporal regions, and both semantic variant primary progressive aphasia and behavio

55 rbal semantic deficits and meet criteria for semantic variant primary progressive aphasia and semanti

56 egiline was administered to one patient with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia before repe

57 18F-AV-1451 binding was increased in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia compared to

58 ol subjects (P < 0.001), while patients with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia discounted

59 Moreover, patients with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia had a signi

60 Observations in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia have inspir

61 he selective impairment for natural kinds in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia is related

62 se findings suggest that cortical atrophy in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia may follow

63 havioral variant frontotemporal dementia and semantic variant primary progressive aphasia patients al

64 rophy in 100% of individual patients in both semantic variant primary progressive aphasia samples.

65 Within semantic variant primary progressive aphasia the right-h

66 Regression analyses related performance in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia to ventral

67 People with semantic dementia (SD) or semantic variant primary progressive aphasia typically p

68 Eight amyloid-PET-negative patients with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia underwent 1

69 rominent and consistent region of atrophy in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia using corti

70 racterized the topography of inflammation in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia using high-

71 havioral variant frontotemporal dementia and semantic variant primary progressive aphasia were most l

72 alth of neuroimaging research has associated semantic variant primary progressive aphasia with distri

73 uent variant primary progressive aphasia, or semantic variant primary progressive aphasia), or mild c

74 nt frontotemporal dementia, 14 patients with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia, 25 patient

75 f progression of the pathological process in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia, should be

76 resembled the distributed atrophy pattern in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia.

77 pe C, the subtype seen in most patients with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia.

78 contribute to the semantic memory deficit in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia.

79 study in healthy subjects and patients with semantic variant primary progressive aphasia.

80 could explain the 18F-flortaucipir signal in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia.

81 ammatic variant primary progressive aphasia; semantic variant primary progressive aphasia; logopenic

82 l-variant (bvFTD) and semantic dementia (SD)/semantic-variant primary progressive aphasia subtypes.

83 s [45 behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD) and 35 semantic variant progressive primary aphasia (svPPA)] an

84 gnificant deficits in the non-fluent and the semantic variant remained after partialling out effects

85 ng emotional prosody, whereas those with the semantic variant show more widespread deficits in social

86 with primary progressive aphasia (eight with semantic variant, six with non-fluent/agrammatic variant

87 c variant, nfvPPA; logopenic variant, lvPPA; semantic variant, svPPA) and behavioural variant frontot

88 A subset of patients with the semantic variant were also impaired, though less severel

89 S1 was correlated strongly with the semantic variant, whereas S2, S3 and S4 showed mixed ass