Adult-onset Alexander disease with typical "tadpole" brainstem atrophy and unusual bilateral basal ganglia involvement: a case report and review of the literature

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Alexander disease (ALX) is a rare neurological disorder characterized by white matter degeneration and cytoplasmic inclusions in astrocytes called Rosenthal fibers, labeled by antibodies against glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). Three subtypes are distinguished according to age at onset: infantile (under age 2), juvenile (age 2 to 12) and adult (over age 12). Following the identification of heterozygous mutations in <it>GFAP </it>that cause this disease, cases of adult-onset ALX have been increasingly reported.</p> <p>Case Presentation</p> <p>We present a 60-year-old Japanese man with an unremarkable past and no family history of ALX. After head trauma in a traffic accident at the age of 46, his character changed, and dementia and dysarthria developed, but he remained independent. Spastic paresis and dysphagia were observed at age 57 and 59, respectively, and worsened progressively. Neurological examination at the age of 60 revealed dementia, pseudobulbar palsy, left-side predominant spastic tetraparesis, axial rigidity, bradykinesia and gaze-evoked nystagmus. Brain MRI showed tadpole-like atrophy of the brainstem, caused by marked atrophy of the medulla oblongata, cervical spinal cord and midbrain tegmentum, with an intact pontine base. Analysis of the <it>GFAP </it>gene revealed a heterozygous missense mutation, c.827G>T, p.R276L, which was already shown to be pathogenic in a case of pathologically proven hereditary adult-onset ALX.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The typical tadpole-like appearance of the brainstem is strongly suggestive of adult-onset ALX, and should lead to a genetic investigation of the <it>GFAP </it>gene. The unusual feature of this patient is the symmetrical involvement of the basal ganglia, which is rarely observed in the adult form of the disease. More patients must be examined to confirm, clinically and neuroradiologically, extrapyramidal involvement of the basal ganglia in adult-onset ALX.</p

Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact

Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a “Green List of Species” (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species’ progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species’ viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species’ recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard