Comparing ATN-T designation by tau PET visual reads, tau PET quantification, and CSF PTau181 across three cohorts

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift

Standard

Comparing ATN-T designation by tau PET visual reads, tau PET quantification, and CSF PTau181 across three cohorts. / Provost, Karine; Iaccarino, Leonardo; Soleimani-Meigooni, David N.; Baker, Suzanne; Edwards, Lauren; Eichenlaub, Udo; Hansson, Oskar; Jagust, William; Janabi, Mustafa; La Joie, Renaud; Lesman-Segev, Orit; Mellinger, Taylor J.; Miller, Bruce L.; Ossenkoppele, Rik; Pham, Julie; Smith, Ruben; Sonni, Ida; Strom, Amelia; Mattsson-Carlgren, Niklas; Rabinovici, Gil D.; Alzheimer’S Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (Adni).

I: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 04.01.2021.

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift

Harvard

Provost, K, Iaccarino, L, Soleimani-Meigooni, DN, Baker, S, Edwards, L, Eichenlaub, U, Hansson, O, Jagust, W, Janabi, M, La Joie, R, Lesman-Segev, O, Mellinger, TJ, Miller, BL, Ossenkoppele, R, Pham, J, Smith, R, Sonni, I, Strom, A, Mattsson-Carlgren, N, Rabinovici, GD & Alzheimer’S Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (Adni) 2021, 'Comparing ATN-T designation by tau PET visual reads, tau PET quantification, and CSF PTau181 across three cohorts', European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-05152-8

APA

Provost, K., Iaccarino, L., Soleimani-Meigooni, D. N., Baker, S., Edwards, L., Eichenlaub, U., Hansson, O., Jagust, W., Janabi, M., La Joie, R., Lesman-Segev, O., Mellinger, T. J., Miller, B. L., Ossenkoppele, R., Pham, J., Smith, R., Sonni, I., Strom, A., Mattsson-Carlgren, N., ... Alzheimer’S Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (Adni) (2021). Comparing ATN-T designation by tau PET visual reads, tau PET quantification, and CSF PTau181 across three cohorts. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-05152-8

CBE

Provost K, Iaccarino L, Soleimani-Meigooni DN, Baker S, Edwards L, Eichenlaub U, Hansson O, Jagust W, Janabi M, La Joie R, Lesman-Segev O, Mellinger TJ, Miller BL, Ossenkoppele R, Pham J, Smith R, Sonni I, Strom A, Mattsson-Carlgren N, Rabinovici GD, Alzheimer’S Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (Adni). 2021. Comparing ATN-T designation by tau PET visual reads, tau PET quantification, and CSF PTau181 across three cohorts. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-05152-8

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Provost, Karine ; Iaccarino, Leonardo ; Soleimani-Meigooni, David N. ; Baker, Suzanne ; Edwards, Lauren ; Eichenlaub, Udo ; Hansson, Oskar ; Jagust, William ; Janabi, Mustafa ; La Joie, Renaud ; Lesman-Segev, Orit ; Mellinger, Taylor J. ; Miller, Bruce L. ; Ossenkoppele, Rik ; Pham, Julie ; Smith, Ruben ; Sonni, Ida ; Strom, Amelia ; Mattsson-Carlgren, Niklas ; Rabinovici, Gil D. ; Alzheimer’S Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (Adni). / Comparing ATN-T designation by tau PET visual reads, tau PET quantification, and CSF PTau181 across three cohorts. I: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2021.

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing ATN-T designation by tau PET visual reads, tau PET quantification, and CSF PTau181 across three cohorts

AU - Provost, Karine

AU - Iaccarino, Leonardo

AU - Soleimani-Meigooni, David N.

AU - Baker, Suzanne

AU - Edwards, Lauren

AU - Eichenlaub, Udo

AU - Hansson, Oskar

AU - Jagust, William

AU - Janabi, Mustafa

AU - La Joie, Renaud

AU - Lesman-Segev, Orit

AU - Mellinger, Taylor J.

AU - Miller, Bruce L.

AU - Ossenkoppele, Rik

AU - Pham, Julie

AU - Smith, Ruben

AU - Sonni, Ida

AU - Strom, Amelia

AU - Mattsson-Carlgren, Niklas

AU - Rabinovici, Gil D.

AU - Alzheimer’S Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (Adni)

PY - 2021/1/4

Y1 - 2021/1/4

N2 - Purpose: To compare rates of tau biomarker positivity (T-status) per the 2018 Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) Research Framework derived from [18F]flortaucipir (FTP) PET visual assessment, FTP quantification, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) phosphorylated Tau-181 (PTau181). Methods: We included 351 subjects with varying clinical diagnoses from three cohorts with available FTP PET and CSF PTau181 within 18 months. T-status was derived from (1) FTP visual assessment by two blinded raters; (2) FTP standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) quantification from a temporal meta-ROI (threshold: SUVR ≥1.27); and (3) Elecsys® Phospho-Tau (181P) CSF (Roche Diagnostics) concentrations (threshold: PTau181 ≥ 24.5 pg/mL). Results: FTP visual reads yielded the highest rates of T+, while T+ by SUVR increased progressively from cognitively normal (CN) through mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD dementia. T+ designation by CSF PTau181 was intermediate between FTP visual reads and SUVR values in CN, similar to SUVR in MCI, and lower in AD dementia. Concordance in T-status between modality pairs ranged from 68 to 76% and varied by clinical diagnosis, being highest in patients with AD dementia. In discriminating Aβ + MCI and AD subjects from healthy controls and non-AD participants, FTP visual assessment was most sensitive (0.96) but least specific (0.60). Specificity was highest with FTP SUVR (0.91) with sensitivity of 0.89. Sensitivity (0.73) and specificity (0.72) were balanced for PTau181. Conclusion: The choice of tau biomarker may differ by disease stage and research goals that seek to maximize sensitivity or specificity. Visual interpretations of tau PET enhance sensitivity compared to quantification alone, particularly in early disease stages.

AB - Purpose: To compare rates of tau biomarker positivity (T-status) per the 2018 Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) Research Framework derived from [18F]flortaucipir (FTP) PET visual assessment, FTP quantification, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) phosphorylated Tau-181 (PTau181). Methods: We included 351 subjects with varying clinical diagnoses from three cohorts with available FTP PET and CSF PTau181 within 18 months. T-status was derived from (1) FTP visual assessment by two blinded raters; (2) FTP standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) quantification from a temporal meta-ROI (threshold: SUVR ≥1.27); and (3) Elecsys® Phospho-Tau (181P) CSF (Roche Diagnostics) concentrations (threshold: PTau181 ≥ 24.5 pg/mL). Results: FTP visual reads yielded the highest rates of T+, while T+ by SUVR increased progressively from cognitively normal (CN) through mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD dementia. T+ designation by CSF PTau181 was intermediate between FTP visual reads and SUVR values in CN, similar to SUVR in MCI, and lower in AD dementia. Concordance in T-status between modality pairs ranged from 68 to 76% and varied by clinical diagnosis, being highest in patients with AD dementia. In discriminating Aβ + MCI and AD subjects from healthy controls and non-AD participants, FTP visual assessment was most sensitive (0.96) but least specific (0.60). Specificity was highest with FTP SUVR (0.91) with sensitivity of 0.89. Sensitivity (0.73) and specificity (0.72) were balanced for PTau181. Conclusion: The choice of tau biomarker may differ by disease stage and research goals that seek to maximize sensitivity or specificity. Visual interpretations of tau PET enhance sensitivity compared to quantification alone, particularly in early disease stages.

KW - Alzheimer’s disease

KW - Biomarkers

KW - CSF

KW - Flortaucipir

KW - PET

KW - Tau

U2 - 10.1007/s00259-020-05152-8

DO - 10.1007/s00259-020-05152-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 33398408

AN - SCOPUS:85098793440

JO - European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

JF - European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

SN - 1619-7070

ER -