It is debated whether primary progressive apraxia of speech (PPAOS) and progressive agrammatic aphasia (PAA) belong to the same clinical spectrum, traditionally termed non-fluent/agrammatic variant primary progressive aphasia (nfvPPA), or exist as two completely distinct syndromic entities with specific pathologic/prognostic correlates. We analysed speech, language and disease severity features in a comprehensive cohort of patients with progressive motor speech impairment and/or agrammatism to ascertain evidence of naturally occurring, clinically meaningful non-overlapping syndromic entities (e.g. PPAOS and PAA) in our data. We also assessed if data-driven latent clinical dimensions with aetiologic/prognostic value could be identified. We included 98 participants, 43 of whom had an autopsy-confirmed neuropathological diagnosis. Speech pathologists assessed motor speech features indicative of dysarthria and apraxia of speech (AOS). Quantitative expressive/receptive agrammatism measures were obtained and compared with healthy controls. Baseline and longitudinal disease severity was evaluated using the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB). We investigated the data's clustering tendency and cluster stability to form robust symptom clusters and employed principal component analysis to extract data-driven latent clinical dimensions (LCD). The longitudinal CDR-SB change was estimated using linear mixed-effects models. Of the participants included in this study, 93 conformed to previously reported clinical profiles (75 with AOS and agrammatism, 12 PPAOS and six PAA). The remaining five participants were characterized by non-fluent speech, executive dysfunction and dysarthria without apraxia of speech or frank agrammatism. No baseline clinical features differentiated between frontotemporal lobar degeneration neuropathological subgroups. The Hopkins statistic demonstrated a low cluster tendency in the entire sample (0.45 with values near 0.5 indicating random data). Cluster stability analyses showed that only two robust subgroups (differing in agrammatism, executive dysfunction and overall disease severity) could be identified. Three data-driven components accounted for 71% of the variance [(i) severity-agrammatism; (ii) prominent AOS; and (iii) prominent dysarthria]. None of these data-driven LCDs allowed an accurate prediction of neuropathology. The severity-agrammatism component was an independent predictor of a faster CDR-SB increase in all the participants. Higher dysarthria severity, reduced words per minute and expressive and receptive agrammatism severity at baseline independently predicted accelerated disease progression. Our findings indicate that PPAOS and PAA, rather than exist as completely distinct syndromic entities, constitute a clinical continuum. In our cohort, splitting the nfvPPA spectrum into separate clinical phenotypes did not improve clinical-pathological correlations, stressing the need for new biological markers and consensus regarding updated terminology and clinical classification.

The non-fluent/agrammatic variant of primary progressive aphasia (nfvPPA) is a neurodegenerative syndrome primarily defined by the presence of apraxia of speech (AoS) and/or expressive agrammatism. In addition, many patients exhibit dysarthria and/or receptive agrammatism. This leads to substantial phenotypic variation within the speech-language domain across individuals and time, in terms of both the specific combination of symptoms as well as their severity. How to resolve such phenotypic heterogeneity in nfvPPA is a matter of debate. 'Splitting' views propose separate clinical entities: 'primary progressive apraxia of speech' when AoS occurs in the absence of expressive agrammatism, 'progressive agrammatic aphasia' (PAA) in the opposite case, and 'AOS + PAA' when mixed motor speech and language symptoms are clearly present. While therapeutic interventions typically vary depending on the predominant symptom (e.g. AoS versus expressive agrammatism), the existence of behavioural, anatomical and pathological overlap across these phenotypes argues against drawing such clear-cut boundaries. In the current study, we contribute to this debate by mapping behaviour to brain in a large, prospective cohort of well characterized patients with nfvPPA (n = 104). We sought to advance scientific understanding of nfvPPA and the neural basis of speech-language by uncovering where in the brain the degree of MRI-based atrophy is associated with inter-patient variability in the presence and severity of AoS, dysarthria, expressive agrammatism or receptive agrammatism. Our cross-sectional examination of brain-behaviour relationships revealed three main observations. First, we found that the neural correlates of AoS and expressive agrammatism in nfvPPA lie side by side in the left posterior inferior frontal lobe, explaining their behavioural dissociation/association in previous reports. Second, we identified a 'left-right' and 'ventral-dorsal' neuroanatomical distinction between AoS versus dysarthria, highlighting (i) that dysarthria, but not AoS, is significantly influenced by tissue loss in right-hemisphere motor-speech regions; and (ii) that, within the left hemisphere, dysarthria and AoS map onto dorsally versus ventrally located motor-speech regions, respectively. Third, we confirmed that, within the large-scale grammar network, left frontal tissue loss is preferentially involved in expressive agrammatism and left temporal tissue loss in receptive agrammatism. Our findings thus contribute to define the function and location of the epicentres within the large-scale neural networks vulnerable to neurodegenerative changes in nfvPPA. We propose that nfvPPA be redefined as an umbrella term subsuming a spectrum of speech and/or language phenotypes that are closely linked by the underlying neuroanatomy and neuropathology.