Comparing two picture naming tasks in primary progressive aphasia: Insights from behavioural and neural results

Picture naming tests are widely used to evaluate language impairments in neurodegenerative diseases, especially in Primary Progressive Aphasia (PPA). The available tests differ for many factors affecting the performance, e.g. format of stimuli and their psycholinguistic properties. We aim to identify the most appropriate naming test to be used on PPA according to the clinical and research demands. We investigated the behavioural characteristics, i.e. proportion of correct responses and error type, and their neural correlates in two Italian naming tests, CaGi naming (CaGi) and naming subtest of the Screening for Aphasia in NeuroDegeneration battery (SAND), administered to 52 PPA patients who underwent an FDG-PET scan. We analysed the effectiveness of the tests in distinguishing PPA versus controls and among PPA variants, considering the psycholinguistic variables affecting performance. We explored the brain metabolic correlates of behavioural performance in the tests. SAND, differently from CaGi, has time limits for the response and its items are less frequent and acquired later. SAND and CaGi differed in terms of number of correct responses and error profile, suggesting a higher difficulty to name SAND items compared to CaGi. Semantic errors predominated in CaGi, while anomic and semantic errors were equally frequent in SAND. Both tests distinguished PPA from controls, but SAND outperformed CaGi in discriminating among PPA variants. FDG-PET imaging revealed a shared metabolic involvement of temporal areas associated with lexico-semantic processing, encompassing anterior fusiform, temporal pole, and extending to posterior fusiform in sv-PPA. Concluding, a picture naming test with response time limit and items which are less frequent and acquired later in life, as SAND, may be effective at highlighting subtle distinctions between PPA variants, improving the diagnosis. Conversely, a naming test without time limit for the response, as CaGi, may be useful for a better characterization of the nature of the naming impairment at the behavioural level, eliciting more naming errors than anomia, possibly helping in the development of rehabilitation protocols.