Prospective study demonstrates digital biomarkers improve differentiation between Alzheimer’s and FTLD, suggesting enhanced diagnostic accuracy.
Early differentiation between Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is a prerequisite for secondary prevention and targeted trial enrollment, yet remains challenging at disease onset. We investigated whether automated speech analysis could serve as a digital biomarker for early etiological stratification across clinically heterogeneous presentations. In this prospective biomarker-confirmed prognostic study, 172 participants (108 patients with biomarker-confirmed AD or FTLD and 64 controls) completed a standardized speech protocol at initial clinical assessment. Acoustic, temporal, and phonatory features were automatically extracted. Machine learning models and a stacking ensemble were trained using stratified, repeated 5-fold cross-validation to discriminate between AD and FTLD pathology, with exploratory analysis extending to atypical and rare phenotypes crossed with physiopathology, including primary progressive aphasia (PPA) variants. Speech-based models achieved high sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing physiopathology independently (mean area under the curve (AUC)=0.986) and crossed phenotype and physiopathological diagnostic association (mean AUC=0.966).The ensemble identified 82% of cases with clinicopathological discordance. Interpretability analyses revealed distinct speech signatures: AD was associated with global speech slowing and phonatory instability, while FTLD was characterized by reduced verbal output and acoustic hypo-expressivity. Automated speech analysis provides a promising non-invasive digital biomarker for the early etiological stratification of AD and FTLD, including atypical phenotypes, with high accuracy in a monocentric biomarker-confirmed cohort. These findings support the feasibility of speech-based etiological stratification and its potential to complement existing biomarker frameworks, particularly in cases of clinicopathological discordance. External validation is required before clinical deployment can be considered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cunha et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: