Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Amyloid and tau-PET in early-onset AD: Baseline data from the Longitudinal Early-onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS)
Cho H, Mundada NS, Apostolova LG, Carrillo MC, Shankar R, Amuiri AN, Zeltzer E, Windon CC et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2023-09-10
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Introduction We aimed to describe baseline amyloid-beta (Aβ) and tau-positron emission tomograrphy (PET) from Longitudinal Early-onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS), a prospective multi-site observational study of sporadic early-onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD). Methods We analyzed baseline [18F]Florbetaben (Aβ) and [18F]Flortaucipir (tau)-PET from cognitively impaired participants with a clinical diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or AD dementia aged < 65 years. Florbetaben scans were used to distinguish cognitively impaired participants with EOAD (Aβ+) from EOnonAD (Aβ-) based on the combination of visual read by expert reader and image quantification. Results 243/321 (75.7%) of participants were assigned to the EOAD group based on amyloid-PET; 231 (95.1%) of them were tau-PET positive (A+T+). Tau-PET signal was elevated across cortical regions with a parietal-predominant pattern, and higher burden was observed in younger and female EOAD participants. Discussion LEADS data emphasizes the importance of biomarkers to enhance diagnostic accuracy in EOAD. The advanced tau-PET binding at baseline might have implications for therapeutic strategies in patients with EOAD. Highlights 72% of patients with clinical EOAD were positive on both amyloid- and tau-PET. Amyloid-positive patients with EOAD had high tau-PET signal across cortical regions. In EOAD, tau-PET mediated the relationship between amyloid-PET and MMSE. Among EOAD patients, younger onset and female sex were associated with higher tau-PET.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Cho, H., Mundada, N. S., Apostolova, L. G., Carrillo, M. C., Shankar, R., Amuiri, A. N., et al. (2023). Amyloid and tau-PET in early-onset AD: Baseline data from the Longitudinal Early-onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS). Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.13453
Vancouver
Cho H, Mundada NS, Apostolova LG, Carrillo MC, Shankar R, Amuiri AN, et al. Amyloid and tau-PET in early-onset AD: Baseline data from the Longitudinal Early-onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS). Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2023. doi:10.1002/alz.13453. PMID: 37690109.
BibTeX
@article{cho2023-37690109,
author = {Cho, H. and Mundada, N. S. and Apostolova, L. G. and Carrillo, M. C. and Shankar, R. and Amuiri, A. N. and Zeltzer, E. and Windon, C. C. and others},
title = {{Amyloid and tau-PET in early-onset AD: Baseline data from the Longitudinal Early-onset Alzheimer's Disease Study (LEADS)}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1002/alz.13453},
pmid = {37690109},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.13453}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results 243/321 (75.7%) of participants were assigned to the EOAD group based on amyloid-PET; 231 (95.1%) of them were tau-PET positive (A+T+).
- Among EOAD patients, younger onset and female sex were associated with higher tau-PET.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Effect size75.7%; 95.1%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 66/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 66 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 37690109) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 38 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 66 out of 100. |
| Total | 66 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.