Submited on: 02 Sep 2010 10:07:05 PM GMT
Published on: 02 Sep 2010 10:36:24 PM GMT
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    This article discusses an unusual radiographic presentation of progressive Alzheimer's disease.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    No


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    No


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes. It would be a great seminar for residents.


  • Other Comments:

    The patient in this case report demonstrated a significantly higher level of antibodies to beta amyloid than controls. The author also states that it remains unclear if the antibodies have an effect on the progression of Alzheimer's disease.

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Clinical associate professor

  • How to cite:  Maloney W J.Infiltrative Brain Mass due to Progressive Alzheimer's Disease[Review of the article 'Infiltrative Brain Mass Due To Progressive Alzheimer's Disease ' by Lyons M].WebmedCentral 2011;4(3):WMCRW002648
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    A single case report on a woman with a history of Alzheimer's disease with neuroimaging findings suspicious for a neoplasm.  Biopsy revelased instead extensive neurodegenerative changes with gliosis and was tau and beta amyloid positive.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Yes.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    Yes.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    N/A


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    N/A


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    N/A


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    Yes.


  • Other Comments:

    It is an interesting and very well written case report with impressive an impressive MR image and neuropathology and demonstrates an atypical radiographic presentation.  The author correctly points out that sampling error is a possibility in cases where no evidence of neoplasm is identified. However, given that this patient underwent several biopsies throughout the abnormal area identified on the MR scan makes this less likely.  PET-SPECT (with Pittsburgh Compound-B PET +/- FDG-PET/Florbetapir F 18 (AMYViD) which was approved by the FDA in April 2012 as a diagnostic imaging agent) may have helped.  I wonder how the patient and subsequent MR scans would have responded to IVIG ? (Intravenous immunoglobulins as a treatment for Alzheimer's disease: rationale and current evidence. Drugs. 2010 Mar 26;70(5):513-28.)

  • Competing interests:
    No.
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    General neurology.

  • How to cite:  Rison R A.Infiltrative Brain Mass Due To Progressive Alzheimer's Disease[Review of the article 'Infiltrative Brain Mass Due To Progressive Alzheimer's Disease ' by Lyons M].WebmedCentral 2011;3(11):WMCRW002362
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? No
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    the article is excellently presented but references seem to be inadequate.

  • Competing interests:
    no
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    18 year

  • How to cite:  Gilani S A.Infiltrative Brain Mass Due To Progressive Alzheimer's Disease [Review of the article 'Infiltrative Brain Mass Due To Progressive Alzheimer's Disease ' by Lyons M].WebmedCentral 2011;2(12):WMCRW001198
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • Other Comments: This article raises a number of important points: the value of MRI brain scans in investigation of dementia; the role of inflammation in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's disease; and the information that can come from monitoring the patient over time. I would be interested in the following information: did the patient have any functional imaging studies (PET, STECT) done during the period?; was an autopsy done and what did it show in the brain?; did the patient have any CSF markers of abnormal CNS protein fragments? I rate this case report as being very informative.
  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    Webmedcentral Oct 2010. "Am I losing my marbles Doc?"
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    Psychogeriatrician, neuropsychiatrist
  • How to cite:  Morris P L.Infiltrative Brain Mass Due To Progressive Alzheimer's Disease[Review of the article 'Infiltrative Brain Mass Due To Progressive Alzheimer's Disease ' by Lyons M].WebmedCentral 2011;1(10):WMCRW0053
Report abuse