Rapidly Progressive Alzheimer’s Disease: Candidate Mechanisms and Diagnostic Challenges
- 1Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China
Abstract
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) usually follows a slowly progressive course, but some patients experience unusually rapid cognitive and functional decline. This clinical phenotype, commonly termed rapidly progressive Alzheimer’s disease (rpAD), has no consensus definition; its status as a distinct biological entity remains unresolved, and its reported frequency depends strongly on operational criteria and referral settings. To synthesize current evidence, we conducted targeted literature searches (up to August 31, 2026) of clinical, neuropathological, and biomarker studies. This narrative review extends earlier overviews by integrating newer genetic, tau-seeding, and blood-biomarker findings with conflicting clinical evidence, while distinguishing candidate mechanisms from established diagnostic tools. Selected autopsy and biomarker studies suggest differences in amyloid-β and tau conformations, synaptic and mitochondrial proteins, neuroinflammatory responses, and concomitant pathologies; however, most data are associative, derive from small or selected cohorts, and do not establish rpAD as a discrete disease subtype. In practice, evaluation should confirm AD pathology while promptly excluding treatable causes and rapidly progressive mimics, particularly Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), using established tools such as cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, MRI, and PrP RT-QuIC. Cerebrospinal fluid, molecular imaging, structural MRI, and emerging blood biomarkers can provide supportive evidence, but no biomarker profile has been prospectively validated as an rpAD-specific diagnostic rule. Harmonized definitions and prospective, biomarker-stratified multicenter validation are required before candidate mechanisms or biomarkers can guide rpAD-specific interventions.
Related
- Progressive Amyloid‐Related Imaging Abnormalities After Discontinuation of Lecanemab in Early Alzheimer Disease in an APOE ε2/ε4 Carrier
- Single-cell, spatial, and machine learning analyses identify ANKIB1 as an oligodendrocyte-anchored palmitoylation-associated candidate biomarker of Alzheimer’s disease
- Gastrodin alleviates mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease via candidate targeting of ACHE, S1PR5, SERPINE1, and TOP2A: an integrative computational and cellular study
- Selective white matter tract vulnerability associated with tau burden in progressive supranuclear palsy and Alzheimer’s disease
- Mesenchymal stromal cells for progressive multiple sclerosis: current evidence and translational challenges
BibTeX
@article{cao2026rapidly,
title = {{Rapidly Progressive Alzheimer’s Disease: Candidate Mechanisms and Diagnostic Challenges}},
author = {Meiling Cao and Lumin Leng and Ping Liu and Ziqi Fan and Guoping Peng},
journal = {Clinical Interventions in Aging},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.2147/cia.s638910},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s638910},
note = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Rapidly Progressive Alzheimer’s Disease: Candidate Mechanisms and Diagnostic Challenges
AU - Meiling Cao
AU - Lumin Leng
AU - Ping Liu
AU - Ziqi Fan
AU - Guoping Peng
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/26
JO - Clinical Interventions in Aging
DO - 10.2147/cia.s638910
UR - https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s638910
AB - Alzheimer’s disease (AD) usually follows a slowly progressive course, but some patients experience unusually rapid cognitive and functional decline. This clinical phenotype, commonly termed rapidly progressive Alzheimer’s disease (rpAD), has no consensus definition; its status as a distinct biological entity remains unresolved, and its reported frequency depends strongly on operational criteria and referral settings. To synthesize current evidence, we conducted targeted literature searches (up to August 31, 2026) of clinical, neuropathological, and biomarker studies. This narrative review extends earlier overviews by integrating newer genetic, tau-seeding, and blood-biomarker findings with conflicting clinical evidence, while distinguishing candidate mechanisms from established diagnostic tools. Selected autopsy and biomarker studies suggest differences in amyloid-β and tau conformations, synaptic and mitochondrial proteins, neuroinflammatory responses, and concomitant pathologies; however, most data are associative, derive from small or selected cohorts, and do not establish rpAD as a discrete disease subtype. In practice, evaluation should confirm AD pathology while promptly excluding treatable causes and rapidly progressive mimics, particularly Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), using established tools such as cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, MRI, and PrP RT-QuIC. Cerebrospinal fluid, molecular imaging, structural MRI, and emerging blood biomarkers can provide supportive evidence, but no biomarker profile has been prospectively validated as an rpAD-specific diagnostic rule. Harmonized definitions and prospective, biomarker-stratified multicenter validation are required before candidate mechanisms or biomarkers can guide rpAD-specific interventions.
SN - 1176-9092
SN - 1178-1998
ER -