This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

46/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Down syndrome and Alzheimer's

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Objectives Directly compare the brain glucose patterns seen with [F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) between 2 genetically determined forms of Alzheimer's disease: Down syndrome (DS) and autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease (ADAD). Methods Cross-sectional analyses of FDG were performed in individuals with DS (n = 76) from the Alzheimer Biomarker Consortium-Down Syndrome (ABC-DS), ADAD (n = 297), and neurotypical familial controls (n = 188) from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN). Within-group linear regression models and generalized additive models were performed for select regional FDG uptake measures (isthmus cingulate and inferior parietal, precuneus, middle temporal gyrus, and precentral gyrus). Age, sex, apolipoprotein (APOE) ε4 carrier status, and cortical amyloid burden were included within these analyses. Results Even 20 years before expected onset of clinical symptoms, FDG uptake was lower for DS compared to neurotypical familial controls (p Interpretation Brain glucose metabolism is substantially lower for people with DS, even in individuals who are cognitively stable. The patterns of FDG decline are distinct in these 2 genetically determined forms of AD. The diagnostic utility of FDG-PET is specific to the genetic form of AD. ANN NEUROL 2025;98:1237-1248.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Low

This is a cross-sectional study of 76 participants. This cross-sectional imaging study found that brain glucose metabolism was substantially lower in people with Down syndrome than in neurotypical familial controls, even 20 years before expected symptom onset, with patterns distinct from autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease. It describes a biomarker difference and does not test any treatment, cure or prevention.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Abdelmoity, O., Wisch, J. K., Kennedy, J. T., Goyal, M., Vlassenko, A., Flores, S., et al. (2025). Cross-Sectional FDG in Down Syndrome and Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer's Disease. Annals of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.78002

Vancouver

Abdelmoity O, Wisch JK, Kennedy JT, Goyal M, Vlassenko A, Flores S, et al. Cross-Sectional FDG in Down Syndrome and Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer's Disease. Annals of neurology. 2025. doi:10.1002/ana.78002. PMID: 40977577.

BibTeX

@article{abdelmoity2025-40977577,
  author  = {Abdelmoity, O. and Wisch, J. K. and Kennedy, J. T. and Goyal, M. and Vlassenko, A. and Flores, S. and Handen, B. L. and Head, E. and others},
  title   = {{Cross-Sectional FDG in Down Syndrome and Autosomal Dominant Alzheimer's Disease}},
  journal = {Annals of neurology},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1002/ana.78002},
  pmid    = {40977577},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.78002}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: this is a cross-sectional study. Everyone is measured once, so it cannot show which came first. Read it as a snapshot of how two things go together at one moment.
Size: the record lists 76 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Results Even 20 years before expected onset of clinical symptoms, FDG uptake was lower for DS compared to neurotypical familial controls (p Interpretation Brain glucose metabolism is substantially lower for people with DS, even in individuals who are cognitively stable.

Why it matters

This cross-sectional imaging study found that brain glucose metabolism was substantially lower in people with Down syndrome than in neurotypical familial controls, even 20 years before expected symptom onset, with patterns distinct from autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease. It describes a biomarker difference and does not test any treatment, cure or prevention.

Study details

Study designcross-sectional
Participants76
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 46/100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Annals of neurology)
Journal's citation record	3 / 4	Annals of Neurology: journal h-index 437 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	4 / 12	A snapshot of people at one point in time
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	4 / 5	2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	1 / 4	76 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	0 / 7	Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	0 / 5	0.0 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year	0 / 6	Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	0 / 4	Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	3 / 4	Last-listed author Beau M. Ances: h-index 81 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	3 / 3	Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	3 / 3	OpenAlex lists 24 institution(s) in 7 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40977577)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	46 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in Down syndrome and Alzheimer's from nearby years

Also tagged “down”

527 studies in the library carry the topic tag “down”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 527 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Down syndrome and Alzheimer's

See all studies in Down syndrome and Alzheimer's →