Objectives: Research has shown that analyzing intrusion errors generated on verbal learning and memory measures is helpful for distinguishing between the memory disorders associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other neurological disorders, including Huntington’s disease (HD). Moreover, preliminary evidence suggests that certain clinical populations may be prone to exhibit different types of intrusion errors. Methods: We examined the prevalence of two new California Verbal Learning Test-3 (CVLT-3) intrusion subtypes – across-trial novel intrusions and across/within trial repeated intrusions – in individuals with AD or HD. We hypothesized that the encoding/storage impairment associated with medial-temporal involvement in AD would result in a greater number of novel intrusions on the delayed recall trials of the CVLT-3, whereas the executive dysfunction associated with subcortical-frontal involvement in HD would result in a greater number of repeated intrusions across trials. Results: The AD group generated significantly more across-trial novel intrusions than across/within trial repeated intrusions on the delayed cued-recall trials, whereas the HD group showed the opposite pattern on the delayed free-recall trials. Conclusions: These new intrusion subtypes, combined with traditional memory analyses (e.g., recall versus recognition performance), promise to enhance our ability to distinguish between the memory disorders associated with primarily medial-temporal versus subcortical-frontal involvement.

Objectives: Essential tremor (ET) confers an increased risk for developing both amnestic and non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Yet, the optimal measures for detecting mild cognitive changes in individuals with this movement disorder have not been established. We sought to identify the cognitive domains and specific motor-free neuropsychological tests that are most sensitive to mild deficits in cognition as defined by a Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) of 0.5, which is generally associated with a clinical diagnosis of MCI. Methods: A total of 196 ET subjects enrolled in a prospective, longitudinal, clinical-pathological study underwent an extensive motor-free neuropsychological test battery and were assigned a CDR score. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the neuropsychological tests which best identified individuals with CDR of 0.5 (mild deficits in cognition) versus 0 (normal cognition). Results: In regression models, we identified five tests in the domains of Memory and Executive Function which best discriminated subjects with CDR of 0.5 versus 0 (86.9% model classification accuracy). These tests were the California Verbal Learning Test II Total Recall, Logical Memory II, Verbal-Paired Associates I, Category Switching Fluency, and Color-Word Inhibition. Conclusions: Mild cognitive difficulty among ET subjects is best predicted by combined performance on five measures of memory and executive function. These results inform the nature of cognitive dysfunction in ET and the creation of a brief cognitive battery to assess patients with ET for cognitively driven dysfunction in life that could indicate the presence of MCI. (JINS, 2018, 24, 1084–1098)

Objectives: The third edition of the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT-3) includes a new index termed List A versus Novel/Unrelated recognition discriminability (RD) on the Yes/No Recognition trial. Whereas the Total RD index incorporates false positive (FP) errors associated with all distractors (including List B and semantically related items), the new List A versus Novel/Unrelated RD index incorporates only FP errors associated with novel, semantically unrelated distractors. Thus, in minimizing levels of source and semantic interference, the List A versus Novel/Unrelated RD index may yield purer assessments of yes/no recognition memory independent of vulnerability to source memory difficulties or semantic confusion, both of which are often seen in individuals with primarily frontal-system dysfunction (e.g., early Huntington’s disease [HD]). Methods: We compared the performance of individuals with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and HD in mild and moderate stages of dementia on CVLT-3 indices of Total RD and List A versus Novel/Unrelated RD. Results: Although AD and HD subgroups exhibited deficits on both RD indices relative to healthy comparison groups, those with HD generally outperformed those with AD, and group differences were more robust on List A versus Novel/Unrelated RD than on Total RD. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the clinical utility of the new CVLT-3 List A versus Novel/Unrelated RD index, which (a) maximally assesses yes/no recognition memory independent of source and semantic interference; and (b) provides a greater differentiation between individuals whose memory disorder is primarily at the encoding/storage level (e.g., as in AD) versus at the retrieval level (e.g., as in early HD). (JINS, 2018, 24, 833–841)