Home › Research › Biomarkers
Determining Amyloid-β Positivity Using 18F-AZD4694 PET Imaging
Therriault J, Benedet AL, Pascoal TA, Savard M, Ashton NJ, Chamoun M, Tissot C, Lussier F et al.. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 2020-07-31
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
We observed good convergence among the 4 Good convergence was obtained among several methods for determining an optimal cutoff for 18 F-AZD4694 PET positivity. Despite conceptual and analytic idiosyncrasies linked with dichotomization of continuous variables, an 18 F-AZD4694 threshold of 1.55 SUVR had reliable discriminative accuracy. Although clinical use of amyloid PET is currently by visual inspection of scans, quantitative thresholds may be helpful to arbitrate disagreement among raters or in borderline cases.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Therriault, J., Benedet, A. L., Pascoal, T. A., Savard, M., Ashton, N. J., Chamoun, M., et al. (2021). Determining Amyloid-β Positivity Using 18F-AZD4694 PET Imaging. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.120.245209
Vancouver
Therriault J, Benedet AL, Pascoal TA, Savard M, Ashton NJ, Chamoun M, et al. Determining Amyloid-β Positivity Using 18F-AZD4694 PET Imaging. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. 2021. doi:10.2967/jnumed.120.245209. PMID: 32737243.
BibTeX
@article{therriault2021-32737243,
author = {Therriault, J. and Benedet, A. L. and Pascoal, T. A. and Savard, M. and Ashton, N. J. and Chamoun, M. and Tissot, C. and Lussier, F. and others},
title = {{Determining Amyloid-β Positivity Using 18F-AZD4694 PET Imaging}},
journal = {Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.2967/jnumed.120.245209},
pmid = {32737243},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.120.245209}
}
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
- We observed good convergence among the 4 Good convergence was obtained among several methods for determining an optimal cutoff for 18 F-AZD4694 PET positivity.
- Despite conceptual and analytic idiosyncrasies linked with dichotomization of continuous variables, an 18 F-AZD4694 threshold of 1.55 SUVR had reliable discriminative accuracy.
- Although clinical use of amyloid PET is currently by visual inspection of scans, quantitative thresholds may be helpful to arbitrate disagreement among raters or in borderline cases.
Why it matters
This study found that a threshold of 1.55 SUVR for 18F-AZD4694 PET reliably distinguished amyloid positivity, with good agreement across methods. This is about how to read a scan, not about treating, curing, or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants22
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 53/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | Journal of Nuclear Medicine: journal h-index 230 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 22 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) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 5 / 7 | Cited 121 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 17.3 citations a year over 7 year(s) since 2021 |
| Impact for its field and year | 4 / 6 | Cited 9.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 3 / 6 | Cited by 13 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 60 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Pedro Rosa‐Neto: h-index 89 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | McGill University: institution h-index 1,373 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 6 institution(s) in 2 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 32737243) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 53 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
May need a subscription Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 10 Oct 2026), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 27.
Later studies that cite this one
13 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “classification”
835 studies in the library carry the topic tag “classification”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 835 tagged studies.