Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 76 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Introduction The independent contributions of baseline and longitudinal tau positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to cognitive decline remain unclear. Methods We included n = 761 amyloid-positive individuals from the Swedish BioFINDER-2 study with [ 18 F]RO948-tau-PET, 3-Tesla structural-MRI, and cognition (n = 322 with longitudinal imaging data). Linear-mixed-models with random-intercepts and -slopes or linear-regressions were adjusted for age, sex, education, diagnosis, and other-imaging-modality. Results Tau-PET showed stronger associations with cognitive decline than MRI, showing the strongest associations in a neocortical-composite-region with a cognitive composite (β = -0.25 ± 0.02, p < 0.001) for baseline and longitudinal tau-PET (β = -0.62 ± 0.05, p < 0.001). Baseline tau-PET explained the largest proportion of cognitive decline (54.0%-94.0%), with modest mediation effects for longitudinal tau-PET or MRI pathways (2.0%-15.0%). Simulated reductions of tau-PET-slopes (up to 100%) were associated with marginally altered cognitive trajectories. Discussion The strong associations between baseline tau-PET and longitudinal cognition, with marginal contributions of longitudinal tau-PET and MRI, emphasize the importance of baseline tau aggregates for prognostics and treatments in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Highlights Baseline and longitudinal regional tau-PET uptake were more closely associated than structural MRI with longitudinal cognitive decline. Baseline tau-PET was a stronger determinant of longitudinal cognitive decline than longitudinal tau-PET. Simulated reductions of tau-PET accumulation showed limited alterations of cognitive trajectories, with potential implications for tau-targeting therapies.

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

APA 7th

Singleton, E. H., Mattsson-Carlgren, N., Pichet Binette, A., Stomrud, E., Strandberg, O., Palmqvist, S., et al. (2025). Longitudinal tau aggregation, atrophy, and cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.70435

Vancouver

Singleton EH, Mattsson-Carlgren N, Pichet Binette A, Stomrud E, Strandberg O, Palmqvist S, et al. Longitudinal tau aggregation, atrophy, and cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2025. doi:10.1002/alz.70435. PMID: 40629696.

BibTeX

@article{singleton2025-40629696,
  author  = {Singleton, E. H. and Mattsson-Carlgren, N. and Pichet Binette, A. and Stomrud, E. and Strandberg, O. and Palmqvist, S. and Ossenkoppele, R. and Hansson, O.},
  title   = {{Longitudinal tau aggregation, atrophy, and cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1002/alz.70435},
  pmid    = {40629696},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.70435}
}

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 names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 76/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 44 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 76 of 100. Total 76 of 100.44 of the 58 points we could judge = 76 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for 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 44 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 76 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
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 4 / 5 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 761 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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 — / 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 40629696)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 44 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 44 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 76 out of 100.
Total 76 / 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.

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

Related studies in Drug development

Also tagged “longitudinal-tau”

4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “longitudinal-tau”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →