The diagnosis and understanding of apraxia of speech: why including neurodegenerative etiologies may be important

Incidence of Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech and Primary Progressive Aphasia in Olmsted County, MN, 2011-2022

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

No epidemiologic studies have formally assessed the incidence of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) and primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS). Thus, we decided to assess the incidence of these disorders in Olmsted County, MN, between 2011 and 2022, and to characterize clinical, radiographic, and pathologic characteristics of these patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective examination of data from a population-based cohort of patients with PPA and PPAOS prospectively identified in Olmsted County, MN, from 2011 to 2022. The incidence of PPA among adults (older than 18 years) was calculated for Olmsted County as the number of patients per 100,000 person-years during the study period. The adult population of Olmsted County was determined by the annual catchment population reported by the Rochester Epidemiological Project for each year 2011-2022. A behavioral neurologist verified the clinical diagnoses and determined subtypes.

RESULTS

We identified 10 patients (60% female) within the study period (median age of symptoms onset: 70 years; range: 66-73), 8 with PPA and 2 with PPAOS. Of the 8 patients with PPA (6 female patients, 2 male patients), 2 met criteria for non-fluent variant PPA (nfvPPA), 3 for logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA), and 3 for semantic variant (svPPA). Speech evaluation confirmed the clinical diagnoses in all patients and all showed typical imaging findings consistent with their respective subtype. Six patients (2 PPAOS, 2 nfvPPA, 2 lvPPA) died and 3 underwent autopsy (2 PPAOS, 1 nfvPPA), confirming the pathologic diagnosis of progressive supranuclear palsy. The incidence of PPA + PPAOS was 0.70 persons per 100,000 person-years (95% CI 0.34-1.29 persons per 100,000) during the study period. The incidence of PPAOS was 0.14 persons per 100,000 person-years (95% CI 0.02-0.55 persons per 100,000), whereas for the 8 patients with PPA, the incidence was 0.56 persons per 100,000 person-years (95% CI 0.24-1.10 cases per 100,000). The incidence of nfvPPA was 0.14 persons per 100,000 person-years (95% CI 0.02-0.55), 0.21 persons per 100,000 person-years (95% CI 0.04-0.61) for lvPPA, and 0.21 persons per 100,000 person-years (95% CI 0.04-0.61) for svPPA.

DISCUSSION

As a group, PPA and PPAOS are a relatively rare group of diseases. PPAOS has a slightly lower incidence than PPA as a group but similar incidence to the individual PPA variants.

Characterizing Speech Errors Across Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech Subtypes

PURPOSE

Apraxia of speech (AOS) is a motor speech disorder affecting articulatory planning and speech programming. When AOS is the sole manifestation of neurodegeneration, it is termed primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS). Recent work has shown that there are distinct PPAOS subtypes: phonetic, prosodic, and those that do not clearly align with either (mixed). PPAOS subtypes differ with respect to the predominating motor speech difficulties, as well as disease progression and underlying pathology. Because past studies have determined PPAOS subtype based on clinical impression, the goal of the present study was to quantitatively determine the distribution of speech error types across PPAOS subtypes in a word repetition task and to investigate how word complexity affects the type and number of speech errors across PPAOS subtypes.

METHOD

Forty-five patients with PPAOS (13 phonetic, 23 prosodic, and nine mixed) and 45 healthy controls produced multiple repetitions of words that varied in phonetic complexity. Sound additions, deletions, and substitutions/distortions (phonetic errors) and within-word segmentations (prosodic errors) were calculated.

RESULTS

All three PPAOS groups produced significantly more errors than controls, but the total number of errors was comparable among subtypes. The phonetic group produced more phonetic-type errors compared to the prosodic group but comparable to the mixed group. The prosodic group produced more segmentations compared to the phonetic and mixed PPAOS groups. As word complexity increased, the total number of errors increased for PPAOS patients. The phonetic and prosodic groups were more likely to produce phonetic- and prosodic-type errors, respectively, as word complexity increased.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides novel quantitative data showing that PPAOS subtype can be supported by the type and distribution of speech errors in a word repetition task. This may facilitate earlier, more reliable differential diagnosis and aid in disease prognosis, as PPAOS subtypes have distinct disease trajectories.

ADscreen: A speech processing-based screening system for automatic identification of patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementia

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) present a looming public health crisis, affecting roughly 5 million people and 11 % of older adults in the United States. Despite nationwide efforts for timely diagnosis of patients with ADRD, >50 % of them are not diagnosed and unaware of their disease. To address this challenge, we developed ADscreen, an innovative speech-processing based ADRD screening algorithm for the protective identification of patients with ADRD. ADscreen consists of five major components: (i) noise reduction for reducing background noises from the audio-recorded patient speech, (ii) modeling the patient's ability in phonetic motor planning using acoustic parameters of the patient's voice, (iii) modeling the patient's ability in semantic and syntactic levels of language organization using linguistic parameters of the patient speech, (iv) extracting vocal and semantic psycholinguistic cues from the patient speech, and (v) building and evaluating the screening algorithm. To identify important speech parameters (features) associated with ADRD, we used the Joint Mutual Information Maximization (JMIM), an effective feature selection method for high dimensional, small sample size datasets. Modeling the relationship between speech parameters and the outcome variable (presence/absence of ADRD) was conducted using three different machine learning (ML) architectures with the capability of joining informative acoustic and linguistic with contextual word embedding vectors obtained from the DistilBERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers). We evaluated the performance of the ADscreen on an audio-recorded patients' speech (verbal description) for the Cookie-Theft picture description task, which is publicly available in the dementia databank. The joint fusion of acoustic and linguistic parameters with contextual word embedding vectors of DistilBERT achieved F1-score = 84.64 (standard deviation [std] = ±3.58) and AUC-ROC = 92.53 (std = ±3.34) for training dataset, and F1-score = 89.55 and AUC-ROC = 93.89 for the test dataset. In summary, ADscreen has a strong potential to be integrated with clinical workflow to address the need for an ADRD screening tool so that patients with cognitive impairment can receive appropriate and timely care.

Apraxia of Speech in the Spontaneous Speech of Nonfluent/Agrammatic Primary Progressive Aphasia

Background

Apraxia of speech (AOS) is a core feature of nonfluent/agrammatic primary progressive aphasia (naPPA), but its precise characteristics and the prevalence of AOS features in spontaneous speech are debated.

Objective

To assess the frequency of features of AOS in the spontaneous, connected speech of individuals with naPPA and to evaluate whether these features are associated with an underlying motor disorder such as corticobasal syndrome or progressive supranuclear palsy.

Methods

We examined features of AOS in 30 patients with naPPA using a picture description task. We compared these patients to 22 individuals with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia and 30 healthy controls. Each speech sample was evaluated perceptually for lengthened speech segments and quantitatively for speech sound distortions, pauses between and within words, and articulatory groping. We compared subgroups of naPPA with and without at least two features of AOS to assess the possible contribution of a motor impairment to speech production deficits.

Results

naPPA patients produced both speech sound distortions and other speech sound errors. Speech segmentation was found in 27/30 (90%) of individuals. Distortions were identified in 8/30 (27%) of individuals, and other speech sound errors occurred in 18/30 (60%) of individuals. Frequent articulatory groping was observed in 6/30 (20%) of individuals. Lengthened segments were observed rarely. There were no differences in the frequencies of AOS features among naPPA subgroups as a function of extrapyramidal disease.

Conclusion

Features of AOS occur with varying frequency in the spontaneous speech of individuals with naPPA, independently of an underlying motor disorder.

Clinicopathological associations of hemispheric dominance in primary progressive apraxia of speech

OBJECTIVE

Primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS) is associated with imaging abnormalities in the lateral premotor cortex (LPC) and supplementary motor area (SMA). It is not known whether greater involvement of these regions in either hemisphere is associated with demographics, presenting, and/or longitudinal features.

METHODS

In 51 prospectively recruited PPAOS patients who completed [18 F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), we classified patients as left-dominant, right-dominant, or symmetric, based on visual assessment of the LPC and SMA on FDG-PET. SPM and statistical analyses of regional metabolic values were performed. Diagnosis of PPAOS was made if apraxia of speech was present and aphasia absent. Thirteen patients completed ioflupane-123I (dopamine transporter [DAT]) scans. We compared cross-sectional and longitudinal clinicopathological, genetic, and neuroimaging characteristics across the three groups, with area under the receiver-operating curve (AUROC) determined as a measure of effect size.

RESULTS

In all, 49% of the PPAOS patients were classified as left-dominant, 31% as right-dominant, and 20% as symmetric, which was supported by results from the SPM and regional analyses. There were no differences in baseline characteristics. Longitudinally, right-dominant PPAOS showed faster rates of progression of ideomotor apraxia (AUROC 0.79), behavioral disturbances (AUROC 0.84), including disinhibition symptoms (AUROC 0.82) and negative behaviors (AUROC 0.82), and parkinsonism (AUROC 0.75) compared to left-dominant PPAOS. Symmetric PPAOS showed faster rates of dysarthria progression compared to left-dominant (AUROC 0.89) and right-dominant PPAOS (AUROC 0.79). Five patients showed abnormal DAT uptake. Braak neurofibrillary tangle stage differed across groups (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with PPAOS and a right-dominant pattern of hypometabolism on FDG-PET have the fastest rates of decline of behavioral and motor features.

Spatial patterns of elevated magnetic susceptibility in progressive apraxia of speech

PURPOSE

Progressive apraxia of speech (PAOS) is a neurodegenerative disorder affecting the planning or programming of speech. Little is known about its magnetic susceptibility profiles indicative of biological processes such as iron deposition and demyelination. This study aims to clarify (1) the pattern of susceptibility in PAOS patients, (2) the susceptibility differences between the phonetic (characterized by predominance of distorted sound substitutions and additions) and prosodic (characterized by predominance of slow speech rate and segmentation) subtypes of PAOS, and (3) the relationships between susceptibility and symptom severity.

METHODS

Twenty patients with PAOS (nine phonetic and eleven prosodic subtypes) were prospectively recruited and underwent a 3 Tesla MRI scan. They also underwent detailed speech, language, and neurological evaluations. Quantitative susceptibility maps (QSM) were reconstructed from multi-echo gradient echo MRI images. Region of interest analysis was conducted to estimate susceptibility coefficients in several subcortical and frontal regions. We compared susceptibility values between PAOS and an age-matched control group and performed a correlation analysis between susceptibilities and an apraxia of speech rating scale (ASRS) phonetic and prosodic feature ratings.

RESULTS

The magnetic susceptibility of PAOS was statistically greater than that of controls in subcortical regions (left putamen, left red nucleus, and right dentate nucleus) (p < 0.01, also survived FDR correction) and in the left white-matter precentral gyrus (p < 0.05, but not survived FDR correction). The prosodic patients showed greater susceptibilities than controls in these subcortical and precentral regions. The susceptibility in the left red nucleus and in the left precentral gyrus correlated with the prosodic sub-score of the ASRS.

CONCLUSION

Magnetic susceptibility in PAOS patients was greater than controls mainly in the subcortical regions. While larger samples are needed before QSM is considered ready for clinical differential diagnosis, the present study contributes to our understanding of magnetic susceptibility changes and the pathophysiology of PAOS.

A Tool for Differential Diagnosis of Childhood Apraxia of Speech and Dysarthria in Children: A Tutorial

PURPOSE

While there has been mounting research centered on the diagnosis of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS), little has focused on differentiating CAS from pediatric dysarthria. Because CAS and dysarthria share overlapping speech symptoms and some children have both motor speech disorders, differential diagnosis can be challenging. There is a need for clinical tools that facilitate assessment of both CAS and dysarthria symptoms in children. The goals of this tutorial are to (a) determine confidence levels of clinicians in differentially diagnosing dysarthria and CAS and (b) provide a systematic procedure for differentiating CAS and pediatric dysarthria in children.

METHOD

Evidence related to differential diagnosis of CAS and dysarthria is reviewed. Next, a web-based survey of 359 pediatric speech-language pathologists is used to determine clinical confidence levels in diagnosing CAS and dysarthria. Finally, a checklist of pediatric auditory-perceptual motor speech features is presented along with a procedure to identify CAS and dysarthria in children with suspected motor speech impairments. Case studies illustrate application of this protocol, and treatment implications for complex cases are discussed.

RESULTS

The majority (60%) of clinician respondents reported low or no confidence in diagnosing dysarthria in children, and 40% reported they tend not to make this diagnosis as a result. Going forward, clinicians can use the feature checklist and protocol in this tutorial to support the differential diagnosis of CAS and dysarthria in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating this diagnostic protocol into clinical practice should help increase confidence and accuracy in diagnosing motor speech disorders in children. Future research should test the sensitivity and specificity of this protocol in a large sample of children with varying speech sound disorders. Graduate programs and continuing education trainings should provide opportunities to practice rating speech features for children with dysarthria and CAS.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.19709146.

Neuropsychological Profiles of Patients with Progressive Apraxia of Speech and Aphasia

OBJECTIVE

To characterize and compare the neuropsychological profiles of patients with primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS) and apraxia of speech with progressive agrammatic aphasia (AOS-PAA).

METHOD

Thirty-nine patients with PPAOS and 49 patients with AOS-PAA underwent formal neurological, speech, language, and neuropsychological evaluations. Cognitive domains assessed included immediate and delayed episodic memory (Wechsler Memory Scale-Third edition; Logical Memory; Visual Reproduction; Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test), processing speed (Trail Making Test A), executive functioning (Trail Making Test B; Delis-Kaplan Executive Functioning Scale - Sorting), and visuospatial ability (Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure copy).

RESULTS

The PPAOS patients were cognitively average or higher in the domains of immediate and delayed episodic memory, processing speed, executive functioning, and visuospatial ability. Patients with AOS-PAA performed more poorly on tests of immediate and delayed episodic memory and executive functioning compared to those with PPAOS. For every 1 unit increase in aphasia severity (e.g. mild to moderate), performance declined by 1/3 to 1/2 a standard deviation depending on cognitive domain. The degree of decline was stronger within the more verbally mediated domains, but was also notable in less verbally mediated domains.

CONCLUSION

The study provides neuropsychological evidence further supporting the distinction of PPAOS from primary progressive aphasia and should be used to inform future diagnostic criteria. More immediately, it informs prognostication and treatment planning.

Types of motor speech impairments associated with neurologic diseases

Speech disturbances are common consequences of acquired brain injury or neurodegenerative impairment. Although sudden difficulties with speech may signal acute pathologic conditions such as cerebrovascular accidents, determining the etiology of insidious disruptions in communication can be less straightforward. The identification of motor speech impairment, independent of difficulties with language, can be useful for diagnosis since there are subtle, albeit distinct, patterns of speech production impairments associated with different neurologic conditions. Furthermore, the identification of impairments specific to speech production can help elucidate the suspected pathologic mechanisms or even the neuroanatomic structures compromised. During a routine clinical evaluation, early warning signs of motor speech impairment may go undetected if a clinician is unaccustomed to examining motor speech or is unaware of its manifestations. Accordingly, this chapter provides clinicians with a concise yet thorough guide for the practical assessment and differential diagnosis of motor speech disorders (MSDs)-apraxia of speech and dysarthrias. This chapter is divided into neurologic conditions associated with disorders of speech planning/programming, execution, and articulatory control. The underlying mechanisms associated with these impairments are presented both from a clinical perspective as well as through a scientific discussion of recent research in the field on MSDs.

Brain changes underlying progression of speech motor programming impairment

Aquired apraxia of speech is a disorder that impairs speech production, despite intact peripheral neuromotor function. Its pathomechanism remains to be established. Neurodegenerative lesion models provide an unequalled opportunity to explore the neural correlates of apraxia of speech, which is present in a subset of patients diagnosed with non-semantic variants of primary progressive aphasia. The normalized pairwise variability index, an acoustic measure of speech motor programming, has shown high sensitivity and specificity for apraxia of speech in cross-sectional studies. Here, we aimed to examine the strength of the pairwise variability index and overall word duration (i.e. articulation rate) as markers of progressive motor programming deficits in primary progressive aphasia with apraxia of speech. Seventy-nine individuals diagnosed with primary progressive aphasia (39 with non-fluent variant and 40 with logopenic variant) and 40 matched healthy controls participated. Patients were followed-up annually (range 1-6 years, median number of visits = 2). All participants completed a speech assessment task and a high-resolution MRI. Our analyses investigated trajectories of speech production (e.g. pairwise variablity index and word duration) and associations with cortical atrophy in the patients. At first presentation, word duration differentiated the nonfluent and logopenic cases statistically, but the range of scores overlapped substantially across groups. Longitudinally, we observed progressive deterioration in pairwise variability index and word duration specific to the non-fluent group only. The pairwise variability index showed particularly strong associations with progressive atrophy in speech motor programming brain regions. Of novelty, our results uncovered a key role of the right frontal gyrus in underpinning speech motor programming changes in non-fluent cases, highlighting the importance of right-brain regions in responding to progressive neurological changes in the speech motor network. Taken together, our findings validate the use of a new metric, the pairwise variability index, as a robust marker of apraxia of speech in contrast to more generic measures of speaking rate. Sensitive/specific neuroimaging biomarkers of the emergence and progression of speech impairments will be useful to inform theories of the pathomechanisms underpinning impaired speech motor control. Our findings justify developing more sensitive measures of rhythmic temporal control of speech that may enable confident detection of emerging speech disturbances and more sensitive tracking of intervention-related changes for pharmacological, neuromodulatory and behavioural interventions. A more reliable detection of speech disturbances has relevance for patient care, with predominance of progressive apraxia of speech a high-risk factor for later diagnosis of progressive supranuclear palsy or corticobasal degeneration.

Preliminary validation of the apraxia battery for adults-second edition (ABA-2) in Greek patients with dementia

BACKGROUND

Apraxia is considered a supportive feature in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. It has been reported that patients with frontotemporal dementia (FTD) may present apraxia, especially in the buccofacial area. The Apraxia Battery for Adults (ABA-2) is a brief and practical battery for praxis impairment and has been validated in Greek post-stroke patients.

AIM

To validate and evaluate ABA-2 test, translated and culturally adapted, in a sample of Greek demented patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients diagnosed with FTD (n = 20) and AD (n = 20) were included in the study. Age-, gender-, and education- matched healthy controls (n = 20) were also tested. All participants completed Adenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R), Frontal Rating Scale (FRS), Frontal Behavioral Inventory (FBI), and ABA-2 battery. Sensitivity and specificity of ABA-2 were calculated, as well as its consistency and statistical significance for diagnosing apraxia.

RESULTS

The ABA-2 was able to differentiate demented patients from healthy controls with a sensitivity of 77.5% and specificity of 95%. Its validity was confirmed with Cronbach's alpha coefficient > 0.7, indicating satisfactory internal reliability. Statistically significant differences were found when comparing total ABA-2 score (p < 0.0001), as well as 3 out of 6 subtests of ABA-2, between the two study groups. Age, gender and education were not correlated with ABA-2 score.

CONCLUSION

ABA-2 is a valid, reliable and sensitive battery to differentiate demented patients from healthy individuals in the Greek population. We propose the modification of ABA-2 to a 5-subtest tool, to be administered as a bed-side test.

Motor Speech Disorders and Communication Limitations in Progressive Supranuclear Palsy

Purpose This study describes motor speech disorders and associated communication limitations in six variants of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). Method The presence, nature, and severity of dysarthria and apraxia of speech (AOS) were documented, along with scores on the Apraxia of Speech Rating Scale-Version 3 (ASRS-3) for 77 (40 male and 37 female) patients with PSP. Clinician-estimated and patient-estimated communication limitations were rated using the Motor Speech Disorders Severity Rating (MSDSR) Scale and the Communicative Effectiveness Survey (CES), respectively. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each of these dependent variables. One-tailed t tests were conducted to test mean differences in ASRS-3 and CES between participants with and without AOS and between participants with and without dysarthria. Spearman rank correlations were calculated between ASRS-3 scores and clinical judgments of AOS and dysarthria severity and between MSDSR and CES ratings. Results Nine participants (12%) had normal speech. Eighty-seven percent exhibited dysarthria; hypokinetic and mixed hypokinetic-spastic dysarthria were observed most frequently. AOS was observed in 19.5% of participants across all variants, but in only 10% exclusive of the PSP speech and language variant. Nearly half presented with AOS in which neither phonetic nor prosodic features clearly predominated. The mean ASRS-3 score for participants with AOS was significantly higher than for those without and correlated strongly with clinician judgment of AOS severity. Mean ASRS-3 was higher for participants with dysarthria than for those without but correlated weakly with dysarthria severity. Mean MSDSR and CES ratings were lower in participants with AOS compared to those without and moderately correlated with each other. Conclusions Motor speech disorders that negatively impact communicative effectiveness are common in PSP and occur in many variants. This is the first description of motor speech disorders across PSP variants, setting the stage for future research characterizing neuroanatomical correlates, progression of motor speech disorders, and benefits of targeted interventions. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14111837.

Progressive apraxia of speech: delays to diagnosis and rates of alternative diagnoses

BACKGROUND

Progressive apraxia of speech (PAOS) is a neurodegenerative disorder of speech programming distinct from aphasia and dysarthria, most commonly associated with a 4-repeat tauopathy. Our objective was to better understand the reasons for possible delays or diagnostic errors for patients with PAOS.

METHODS

Seventy-seven consecutive PAOS research participants from the Neurodegenerative Research Group were included in this study. The medical records for these patients were reviewed in detail. For each speech-related visit, data such as the chief complaint, clinical findings, and neuroimaging findings were recorded.

RESULTS

Apraxia of speech was the initial diagnosis in 20.1% of participants at first evaluation noted in the historical record. Other common diagnoses included primary progressive aphasia (PPA) (20.1%), dysarthria (18.18%), MCI/Dementia (6.5%), and motor neuron disease (3.9%). It took a median of 2.02 (range: 0.16-8.18) years from symptoms onset for participants to receive an initial diagnosis and 3.00 (range: 0.49-9.42) years to receive a correct diagnosis. Those who were seen by a speech-language pathologist (SLP) during their first documented encounter were more likely to be correctly diagnosed with PAOS (37/48) after SLP consultation than those who were not seen by an SLP on initial encounter (5/29) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 80% of patients with PAOS were imprecisely diagnosed at their first visit, with it taking a median of 3 years from symptom onset to receiving a diagnosis of PAOS. Being seen by a speech-language pathologist during the initial evaluation increased the likelihood of a correct apraxia of speech diagnosis.

Neuroimaging in Frontotemporal Dementia: Heterogeneity and Relationships with Underlying Neuropathology

Frontotemporal dementia encompasses a group of clinical syndromes defined pathologically by degeneration of the frontal and temporal lobes. Historically, these syndromes have been challenging to diagnose, with an average of about three years between the time of symptom onset and the initial evaluation and diagnosis. Research in the field of neuroimaging has revealed numerous biomarkers of the various frontotemporal dementia syndromes, which has provided clinicians with a method of narrowing the differential diagnosis and improving diagnostic accuracy. As such, neuroimaging is considered a core investigative tool in the evaluation of neurodegenerative disorders. Furthermore, patterns of neurodegeneration correlate with the underlying neuropathological substrates of the frontotemporal dementia syndromes, which can aid clinicians in determining the underlying etiology and improve prognostication. This review explores the advancements in neuroimaging and discusses the phenotypic and pathologic features of behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, semantic variant primary progressive aphasia, and nonfluent variant primary progressive aphasia, as seen on structural magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography.

To Lump or to Split? Possible Subtypes of Apraxia of Speech

BACKGROUND

The speculation that apraxia of speech (AOS) is not a unitary diagnosis, but consists of different subtypes instead, has been around for decades. However, attempts to empirically substantiate such a notion remain few and far between.

AIMS

The primary objective of this article is to consider the different bases for identifying subtypes of AOS, review existing evidence regarding subtypes under each classification basis, and provide discussion and implications for future research.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

AOS subtypes have been proposed on the basis of clinical symptomatology, theoretical constructs, and an analogy to limb apraxia. Different possible subtypes of AOS are reviewed, along with their empirical support and limitations. Empirical evidence, particularly in the context of a progressive disease, supports the idea that AOS diagnosis may capture different underlying impairments of speech motor planning. Future research to advance our understanding of AOS should carefully consider the basis for subtype classification, and include large sample sizes to differentiate individual variability from possible subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

Several proposed AOS subtypes have found some support in the literature. Further research is needed to determine the validity, coherence and utility of possible AOS subtypes for theoretical and clinical purposes.

Differential Diagnosis of Apraxia of Speech in Children and Adults: A Scoping Review

Purpose Despite having distinct etiologies, acquired apraxia of speech (AOS) and childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) share the same central diagnostic challenge (i.e., isolating markers specific to an impairment in speech motor planning/programming). The purpose of this review was to evaluate and compare the state of the evidence on approaches to differential diagnosis for AOS and CAS and to identify gaps in each literature that could provide directions for future research aimed to improve clinical diagnosis of these disorders. Method We conducted a scoping review of literature published between 1997 and 2019, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. For both AOS and CAS, literature was charted and summarized around four main methodological approaches to diagnosis: speech symptoms, quantitative speech measures, impaired linguistic-motor processes, and neuroimaging. Results Results showed that similar methodological approaches have been used to study differential diagnosis of apraxia of speech in adults and children; however, the specific measures that have received the most research attention differ between AOS and CAS. Several promising candidate markers for AOS and CAS have been identified; however, few studies report metrics that can be used to assess their diagnostic accuracy. Conclusions Over the past two decades, there has been a proliferation of research identifying potential diagnostic markers of AOS and CAS. In order to improve clinical diagnosis of AOS and CAS, there is a need for studies testing the diagnostic accuracy of multiple candidate markers, better control over language impairment comorbidity, more inclusion of speech-disordered control groups, and an increased focus on translational work moving toward clinical implementation of promising measures.

Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech: From Recognition to Diagnosis and Care

BACKGROUND

Apraxia of speech (AOS) can be caused by neurodegenerative disease and sometimes is its presenting sign (i.e., primary progressive apraxia of speech, PPAOS). During the last several decades our understanding of PPAOS has evolved from clinical recognition to a fuller understanding of its core and associated clinical features, its distinction from but relationship with primary progressive aphasia, its temporal course and eventual progression to include other neurological deficits, and its neuroimaging correlates and underlying pathology.

AIMS

This paper provides a comprehensive summary of the literature that has built the current knowledge base about PPAOS and progressive AOS as it co-occurs with progressive aphasia. It reviews the history of its emergence as a recognized syndrome; its relationship with the agrammatic/nonfluent variant of primary progressive aphasia; its salient perceptual features and subtypes; the acoustic and structural/physiological imaging measures that index its presence, severity, and distinction from aphasia; and principles and available data regarding its management and care.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

A broad summary of what is known about AOS as a manifestation of neurodegenerative disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary progressive apraxia of speech is a recognizable syndrome that can be distinguished from other neurodegenerative conditions that affect speech and language.

Primary Progressive Aphasias and Apraxia of Speech

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews two of the primary progressive aphasias (PPAs), disorders characterized by the early and predominant impairment of language, and primary progressive apraxia of speech, a degenerative motor speech disorder that is closely related to PPA. An outline of the history and controversy surrounding how these disorders are classified is provided before the article focuses on each disorder's clinical and imaging features.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the past decade, the classification of degenerative speech and language disorders has been refined. Clinical, imaging, and pathologic evidence suggests that primary progressive apraxia of speech is a distinct degenerative disorder. Furthermore, multiple lines of evidence have highlighted issues with nonfluent/agrammatic variant PPA, which complicates the diagnosis, prognosis, and study of this disorder. Semantic variant PPA, while not without controversy, remains one of the most well-defined disorders, with good clinicopathologic correlation.

SUMMARY

Accurate classification and diagnosis of these degenerative speech and language disorders is crucial in clinical practice and ongoing research efforts. For nonfluent/agrammatic variant PPA, the authors suggest emphasizing agrammatism as the core inclusion criterion and taking care not to include patients with isolated or predominant apraxia of speech. Isolated apraxia of speech can be the manifestation of a degenerative disease and, based on the different prognosis, should be recognized as distinct from PPA. Finally, it is important to recognize that some patients with semantic dementia, despite sharing the same pathologic associations, may not meet criteria for PPA.

Prosodic and phonetic subtypes of primary progressive apraxia of speech

Primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS) is a clinical syndrome in which apraxia of speech is the initial indication of neurodegenerative disease. Prior studies of PPAOS have identified hypometabolism, grey matter atrophy, and white matter tract degeneration in the frontal gyri, precentral cortex, and supplementary motor area (SMA). Recent clinical observations suggest two distinct subtypes of PPAOS may exist. Phonetic PPAOS is characterized predominantly by distorted sound substitutions. Prosodic PPAOS is characterized predominantly by slow, segmented speech. Demographic, clinical, and neuroimaging data (MRI, DTI, and FDG-PET) were analyzed to validate these subtypes and explore anatomic correlates. The Phonetic subtype demonstrated bilateral involvement of the SMA, precentral gyrus, and cerebellar crus. The Prosodic subtype demonstrated more focal involvement in the SMA and right superior cerebellar peduncle. The findings provide converging evidence that differences in the reliably determined predominant clinical characteristics of AOS are associated with distinct imaging patterns, independent of severity.

Recovery of brain abscess-induced stuttering after neurosurgical intervention

Stuttering occurs in approximately 5% of all children and 1% of adults. One type, neurogenic stuttering, is usually attributable to strokes or other structural damages to the brain areas that are responsible for language fluency. Here, we present the first case of neurogenic stuttering caused by a brain abscess. The patient was a 60-year-old man admitted for a seizure and administered an anticonvulsant, after which he began stuttering. MRI revealed a brain abscess in the left frontal lobe that extended to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (BA (Brodmann's area) 9 and 46), frontal eye field (BA 8) and premotor cortex and supplementary motor area (BA 6). After neurosurgical drainage and antibiotic treatment, the symptoms had resolved. This case is unique in that the therapeutic effects and localisation of the cause of stuttering were rapidly identified, allowing for a more accurate description of the neural circuitry related to stuttering.

Clinical and imaging progression over 10 years in a patient with primary progressive apraxia of speech and autopsy-confirmed corticobasal degeneration

Primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS) is a neurodegenerative disorder in which AOS is the sole presenting complaint. We report clinical and neuroimaging data spanning 10 years from disease onset-to-death in a 49 year-old male PPAOS patient, DY, who died with corticobasal degeneration. He presented with AOS with normal neuroimaging. Abnormalities in the caudate nucleus, supplementary motor area, cingulate, insula, and Broca's area were observed after five years, with involvement of motor cortex and development of agrammatism, Parkinsonism, and dysarthria three years later. Cognitive impairment and temporoparietal atrophy were late features. This data provides important insight into disease progression of corticobasal degeneration when presenting as PPAOS.

Disrupted functional connectivity in primary progressive apraxia of speech

Apraxia of speech is a motor speech disorder thought to result from impaired planning or programming of articulatory movements. It can be the initial or only manifestation of a degenerative disease, termed primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS). The aim of this study was to use task-free functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to assess large-scale brain network pathophysiology in PPAOS. Twenty-two PPAOS participants were identified from a prospective cohort of degenerative speech and language disorders patients. All participants had a comprehensive, standardized evaluation including an evaluation by a speech-language pathologist, examination by a behavioral neurologist and a multimodal imaging protocol which included a task-free fMRI sequence. PPAOS participants were age and sex matched to amyloid-negative, cognitively normal participants with a 1:2 ratio. We chose a set of hypothesis driven, predefined intrinsic connectivity networks (ICNs) from a large, out of sample independent component analysis and then used them to initialize a spatiotemporal dual regression to estimate participant level connectivity within these ICNs. Specifically, we evaluated connectivity within the speech and language, face and hand sensorimotor, left working memory, salience, superior parietal, supramarginal, insular and deep gray ICNs in a multivariate manner. The spatial maps for each ICN were then compared between PPAOS and control participants. We used clinical measures of apraxia of speech severity to assess for clinical-connectivity correlations for regions found to differ between PPAOS and control participants. Compared to controls, PPAOS participants had reduced connectivity of the right supplementary motor area and left posterior temporal gyrus to the rest of the speech and language ICN. The connectivity of the right supplementary motor area correlated negatively with an articulatory error score. PPAOS participants also had reduced connectivity of the left supplementary motor area to the face sensorimotor ICN, between the left lateral prefrontal cortex and the salience ICN and between the left temporal-occipital junction and the left working memory ICN. The latter connectivity correlated with the apraxia of speech severity rating scale, although the finding did not survive correction for multiple comparisons. Increased connectivity was noted in PPAOS participants between the dorsal posterior cingulate and the left working memory ICN. Our results support the importance of the supplementary motor area in the pathophysiology of PPAOS, which appears to be disconnected from speech and language regions. Supplementary motor area connectivity may serve as a biomarker of degenerative apraxia of speech severity.

The Effect of Speech Repetition Rate on Neural Activation in Healthy Adults: Implications for Treatment of Aphasia and Other Fluency Disorders

Functional imaging studies have provided insight into the effect of rate on production of syllables, pseudowords, and naturalistic speech, but the influence of rate on repetition of commonly-used words/phrases suitable for therapeutic use merits closer examination. Aim: To identify speech-motor regions responsive to rate and test the hypothesis that those regions would provide greater support as rates increase, we used an overt speech repetition task and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to capture rate-modulated activation within speech-motor regions and determine whether modulations occur linearly and/or show hemispheric preference. Methods: Twelve healthy, right-handed adults participated in an fMRI task requiring overt repetition of commonly-used words/phrases at rates of 1, 2, and 3 syllables/second (syll./sec.). Results: Across all rates, bilateral activation was found both in ventral portions of primary sensorimotor cortex and middle and superior temporal regions. A repeated measures analysis of variance with pairwise comparisons revealed an overall difference between rates in temporal lobe regions of interest (ROIs) bilaterally (p < 0.001); all six comparisons reached significance (p < 0.05). Five of the six were highly significant (p < 0.008), while the left-hemisphere 2- vs. 3-syll./sec. comparison, though still significant, was less robust (p = 0.037). Temporal ROI mean beta-values increased linearly across the three rates bilaterally. Significant rate effects observed in the temporal lobes were slightly more pronounced in the right-hemisphere. No significant overall rate differences were seen in sensorimotor ROIs, nor was there a clear hemispheric effect. Conclusion: Linear effects in superior temporal ROIs suggest that sensory feedback corresponds directly to task demands. The lesser degree of significance in left-hemisphere activation at the faster, closer-to-normal rate may represent an increase in neural efficiency (and therefore, decreased demand) when the task so closely approximates a highly-practiced function. The presence of significant bilateral activation during overt repetition of words/phrases at all three rates suggests that repetition-based speech production may draw support from either or both hemispheres. This bihemispheric redundancy in regions associated with speech-motor control and their sensitivity to changes in rate may play an important role in interventions for nonfluent aphasia and other fluency disorders, particularly when right-hemisphere structures are the sole remaining pathway for production of meaningful speech.

Contemporary Approaches to the Management of Post-stroke Apraxia of Speech

Apraxia of speech (AOS) is a motor speech disorder that disrupts the planning and programming of speech motor movements. In the acute stage of stroke recovery, AOS following unilateral (typically) left hemisphere stroke can occur alongside dysarthria, an impairment in speech execution and control, and/or aphasia, a higher-level impairment in language function. At this time, perceptual evaluation (the systematic, although subjective, description of speech and voice characteristics) is perhaps the only "gold standard" for differential diagnosis when it comes to motor speech disorders. This poses a challenge for speech-language pathologists charged with the evaluation of poststroke communication abilities, as distinguishing production impairments associated with AOS from those that can occur in aphasia and/or dysarthria can be difficult, especially when more than one deficit is present. Given the need for more objective, reliable methods to identify and diagnose AOS, several studies have turned to acoustic evaluation and neuroimaging to supplement clinical assessment. This article focuses on these recent advances. Studies investigating acoustic evaluation of AOS will be reviewed, as well as those that have considered the extent that neuroimaging can guide clinical decision making. Developments in the treatment of AOS will also be discussed. Although more research is needed regarding the use of these methods in everyday clinical practice, the studies reviewed here show promise as emerging tools for the management of AOS.

A Diagnostic Marker to Discriminate Childhood Apraxia of Speech From Speech Delay: IV. The Pause Marker Index

Purpose

Three previous articles provided rationale, methods, and several forms of validity support for a diagnostic marker of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS), termed the pause marker (PM). Goals of the present article were to assess the validity and stability of the PM Index (PMI) to scale CAS severity.

Method

PM scores and speech, prosody, and voice precision-stability data were obtained for participants with CAS in idiopathic, neurogenetic, and complex neurodevelopmental disorders; adult-onset apraxia of speech consequent to stroke and primary progressive apraxia; and idiopathic speech delay. Three studies were completed including criterion and concurrent validity studies of the PMI and a temporal stability study of the PMI using retrospective case studies.

Results

PM scores were significantly correlated with other signs of CAS precision and stability. The best fit of the distribution of PM scores to index CAS severity was obtained by dividing scores into 4 ordinal severity classifications: mild, mild-moderate, moderate-severe, and severe. Severity findings for the 4 classifications and retrospective longitudinal findings from 8 participants with CAS supported the validity and stability of the PMI.

Conclusion

Findings support research and clinical use of the PMI to scale the severity of CAS.

A Diagnostic Marker to Discriminate Childhood Apraxia of Speech From Speech Delay: II. Validity Studies of the Pause Marker

Purpose

The purpose of this 2nd article in this supplement is to report validity support findings for the Pause Marker (PM), a proposed single-sign diagnostic marker of childhood apraxia of speech (CAS).

Method

PM scores and additional perceptual and acoustic measures were obtained from 296 participants in cohorts with idiopathic and neurogenetic CAS, adult-onset apraxia of speech and primary progressive apraxia of speech, and idiopathic speech delay.

Results

Adjusted for questionable specificity disagreements with a pediatric Mayo Clinic diagnostic standard, the estimated sensitivity and specificity, respectively, of the PM were 86.8% and 100% for the CAS cohort, yielding positive and negative likelihood ratios of 56.45 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.15, 2763.31]) and 0.13 (95% CI [0.06, 0.30]). Specificity of the PM for 4 cohorts totaling 205 participants with speech delay was 98.5%.

Conclusion

These findings are interpreted as providing support for the PM as a near-conclusive diagnostic marker of CAS.

Characterizing Articulation in Apraxic Speech Using Real-Time Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Purpose

Real-time magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and accompanying analytical methods are shown to capture and quantify salient aspects of apraxic speech, substantiating and expanding upon evidence provided by clinical observation and acoustic and kinematic data. Analysis of apraxic speech errors within a dynamic systems framework is provided and the nature of pathomechanisms of apraxic speech discussed.

Method

One adult male speaker with apraxia of speech was imaged using real-time MRI while producing spontaneous speech, repeated naming tasks, and self-paced repetition of word pairs designed to elicit speech errors. Articulatory data were analyzed, and speech errors were detected using time series reflecting articulatory activity in regions of interest.

Results

Real-time MRI captured two types of apraxic gestural intrusion errors in a word pair repetition task. Gestural intrusion errors in nonrepetitive speech, multiple silent initiation gestures at the onset of speech, and covert (unphonated) articulation of entire monosyllabic words were also captured.

Conclusion

Real-time MRI and accompanying analytical methods capture and quantify many features of apraxic speech that have been previously observed using other modalities while offering high spatial resolution. This patient's apraxia of speech affected the ability to select only the appropriate vocal tract gestures for a target utterance, suppressing others, and to coordinate them in time.

Brain damage associated with apraxia of speech: evidence from case studies

The site of crucial damage that causes acquired apraxia of speech (AOS) has been debated in the literature. This study presents five in-depth cases that offer insight into the role of brain areas involved in AOS. Four of the examined participants had a primary impairment of AOS either with (n = 2) or without concomitant mild aphasia (n = 2). The fifth participant presented with a lesion relatively isolated to the left anterior insula (AIns-L), damage that is rarely reported in the literature, but without AOS. Taken together, these cases challenge the role of the AIns-L and implicate the left motor regions in AOS.

Primary progressive apraxia of speech: clinical features and acoustic and neurologic correlates

PURPOSE

This study summarizes 2 illustrative cases of a neurodegenerative speech disorder, primary progressive apraxia of speech (AOS), as a vehicle for providing an overview of the disorder and an approach to describing and quantifying its perceptual features and some of its temporal acoustic attributes.

METHOD

Two individuals with primary progressive AOS underwent speech-language and neurologic evaluations on 2 occasions, ranging from 2.0 to 7.5 years postonset. Performance on several tests, tasks, and rating scales, as well as several acoustic measures, were compared over time within and between cases. Acoustic measures were compared with performance of control speakers.

RESULTS

Both patients initially presented with AOS as the only or predominant sign of disease and without aphasia or dysarthria. The presenting features and temporal progression were captured in an AOS Rating Scale, an Articulation Error Score, and temporal acoustic measures of utterance duration, syllable rates per second, rates of speechlike alternating motion and sequential motion, and a pairwise variability index measure.

CONCLUSIONS

AOS can be the predominant manifestation of neurodegenerative disease. Clinical ratings of its attributes and acoustic measures of some of its temporal characteristics can support its diagnosis and help quantify its salient characteristics and progression over time.

Motor Speech Disorders Associated with Primary Progressive Aphasia

BACKGROUND

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) and conditions that overlap with it can be accompanied by motor speech disorders. Recognition and understanding of motor speech disorders can contribute to a fuller clinical understanding of PPA and its management as well as its localization and underlying pathology.

AIMS

To review the types of motor speech disorders that may occur with PPA, its primary variants, and its overlap syndromes (progressive supranuclear palsy syndrome, corticobasal syndrome, motor neuron disease), as well as with primary progressive apraxia of speech.

MAIN CONTRIBUTION

The review should assist clinicians' and researchers' understanding of the relationship between motor speech disorders and PPA and its major variants. It also highlights the importance of recognizing neurodegenerative apraxia of speech as a condition that can occur with little or no evidence of aphasia.

CONCLUSION

Motor speech disorders can occur with PPA. Their recognition can contribute to clinical diagnosis and management of PPA and to understanding and predicting the localization and pathology associated with PPA variants and conditions that can overlap with them.

The Bedford Alzheimer nursing-severity scale to assess dementia severity in advanced dementia: a nonparametric item response analysis and a study of its psychometric characteristics

The Bedford Alzheimer Nursing-Severity Scale (BANS-S) assesses disease severity in patients with advanced Alzheimer's disease. Since Alzheimer is a progressive disease, studying the hierarchy of the items in the scale can be useful to evaluate the progression of the disease. Data from 164 Alzheimer's patients and 186 patients with other dementia were analyzed using the Mokken Scaling Methodology to determine whether respondents can be ordered in the trait dementia severity, and to study whether an ordering between the items exist. The scalability of the scale was evaluated by the H coefficient. Results showed that the BANS-S is a reliable and medium scale (0.4≤H<0.5) for the Alzheimer group. All items with the exception of the item about mobility could be ordered. When later item was eliminated from the scale, the H coefficient decreased indicating that the scalability of the scale in the original form is more accurate than in the shorter version. For the other dementia group, the BANS-S did not fit any of the Mokken Scaling models because the scale was not unidimensional. In this group, a shorter version of the scale without the sleeping cycle item and the mobility item has better reliability and scalability properties than the original scale.

Whole-exome sequencing supports genetic heterogeneity in childhood apraxia of speech

Background

Childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) is a rare, severe, persistent pediatric motor speech disorder with associated deficits in sensorimotor, cognitive, language, learning and affective processes. Among other neurogenetic origins, CAS is the disorder segregating with a mutation in FOXP2 in a widely studied, multigenerational London family. We report the first whole-exome sequencing (WES) findings from a cohort of 10 unrelated participants, ages 3 to 19 years, with well-characterized CAS.

Methods

As part of a larger study of children and youth with motor speech sound disorders, 32 participants were classified as positive for CAS on the basis of a behavioral classification marker using auditory-perceptual and acoustic methods that quantify the competence, precision and stability of a speaker’s speech, prosody and voice. WES of 10 randomly selected participants was completed using the Illumina Genome Analyzer IIx Sequencing System. Image analysis, base calling, demultiplexing, read mapping, and variant calling were performed using Illumina software. Software developed in-house was used for variant annotation, prioritization and interpretation to identify those variants likely to be deleterious to neurodevelopmental substrates of speech-language development.

Results

Among potentially deleterious variants, clinically reportable findings of interest occurred on a total of five chromosomes (Chr3, Chr6, Chr7, Chr9 and Chr17), which included six genes either strongly associated with CAS (FOXP1 and CNTNAP2) or associated with disorders with phenotypes overlapping CAS (ATP13A4, CNTNAP1, KIAA0319 and SETX). A total of 8 (80%) of the 10 participants had clinically reportable variants in one or two of the six genes, with variants in ATP13A4, KIAA0319 and CNTNAP2 being the most prevalent.

Conclusions

Similar to the results reported in emerging WES studies of other complex neurodevelopmental disorders, our findings from this first WES study of CAS are interpreted as support for heterogeneous genetic origins of this pediatric motor speech disorder with multiple genes, pathways and complex interactions. We also submit that our findings illustrate the potential use of WES for both gene identification and case-by-case clinical diagnostics in pediatric motor speech disorders.

Apraxia of speech: concepts and controversies

PURPOSE

This article was written as an editorial to a collection of original articles on apraxia of speech (AOS) in which some of the more recent advancements in the understanding of this syndrome are discussed. It covers controversial issues concerning the theoretical foundations of AOS. Our approach was motivated by a change of perspective on motor speech that has taken place in neurobiology, neurolinguistics, phonology, and phonetics during the past few decades.

METHOD

The literature on AOS is reviewed from 3 different but overlapping perspectives-that is, a disconnection, a motor memory, and a fine motor skill perspective. Separate sections are devoted to the delimitations of AOS from oral facial apraxia, dysarthria, and phonological impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that many of the still unresolved conceptual issues about AOS arise from an underspecification of existing models of spoken language production. We suggest that phonological and motor impairments of sound production should be studied by an integrated approach.

Apraxia of speech and phonological errors in the diagnosis of nonfluent/agrammatic and logopenic variants of primary progressive aphasia

PURPOSE

The International Consensus Criteria for the diagnosis of primary progressive aphasia (PPA; Gorno-Tempini et al., 2011) propose apraxia of speech (AOS) as 1 of 2 core features of nonfluent/agrammatic PPA and propose phonological errors or absence of motor speech disorder as features of logopenic PPA. We investigated the sensitivity and specificity of AOS and phonological errors as markers for these variants and also investigated the relationship between AOS, phonological errors, and findings on C-labeled Pittsburgh Compound B (PiB)-positron emission tomography (PET) imaging associated with putative Alzheimer-type pathology.

METHOD

Connected speech and word repetition in 23 people with PPA who underwent PiB-PET imaging were rated for apraxic versus phonological disruption by 1 rater who was blind to diagnosis and by 2 raters who were blind to PiB-PET results.

RESULTS

Apraxic characteristics had high sensitivity for nonfluent/agrammatic PPA, and phonological errors had high sensitivity for logopenic PPA; however, phonological errors showed lower specificity for logopenic PPA. On PiB imaging, 8 of 9 people with predominant AOS returned negative results, whereas participants with no or questionable AOS with and without phonological errors returned positive results.

CONCLUSIONS

Attention to AOS and phonological errors may help counter some of the inherent limitations of diagnosis-by-exclusion in the current International Consensus Criteria for diagnosing PPA.