Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Longitudinal validity of PET-based staging of regional amyloid deposition
Irina Jelistratova, Stefan J Teipel, Michel J Grothe. Human brain mapping, 2020-07-10
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Positron emission tomography (PET)-based staging of regional amyloid deposition has recently emerged as a promising tool for sensitive detection and stratification of pathology progression in Alzheimer's Disease (AD). Here we present an updated methodological framework for PET-based amyloid staging using region-specific amyloid-positivity thresholds and assess its longitudinal validity using serial PET acquisitions. We defined region-specific thresholds of amyloid-positivity based on Florbetapir-PET data of 13 young healthy individuals (age ≤ 45y), applied these thresholds to Florbetapir-PET data of 179 cognitively normal older individuals to estimate a regional amyloid staging model, and tested this model in a larger sample of patients with mild cognitive impairment (N = 403) and AD dementia (N = 85). 2-year follow-up Florbetapir-PET scans from a subset of this sample (N = 436) were used to assess the longitudinal validity of the cross-sectional model based on individual stage transitions and data-driven longitudinal trajectory modeling. Results show a remarkable congruence between cross-sectionally estimated and longitudinally modeled trajectories of amyloid accumulation, beginning in anterior temporal areas, followed by frontal and medial parietal areas, the remaining associative neocortex, and finally primary sensory-motor areas and subcortical regions. Over 98% of individual amyloid deposition profiles and longitudinal stage transitions adhered to this staging scheme of regional pathology progression, which was further supported by corresponding changes in cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers. In conclusion, we provide a methodological refinement and longitudinal validation of PET-based staging of regional amyloid accumulation, which may help improving early detection and in-vivo stratification of pathologic disease progression in AD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Jelistratova, I., Teipel, S. J., & Grothe, M. J. (2020). Longitudinal validity of PET-based staging of regional amyloid deposition. Human brain mapping. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25121
Vancouver
Jelistratova I, Teipel SJ, Grothe MJ. Longitudinal validity of PET-based staging of regional amyloid deposition. Human brain mapping. 2020. doi:10.1002/hbm.25121. PMID: 32648624.
BibTeX
@article{jelistratova2020-32648624,
author = {Jelistratova, Irina and Teipel, Stefan J and Grothe, Michel J},
title = {{Longitudinal validity of PET-based staging of regional amyloid deposition}},
journal = {Human brain mapping},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1002/hbm.25121},
pmid = {32648624},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25121}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results show a remarkable congruence between cross-sectionally estimated and longitudinally modeled trajectories of amyloid accumulation, beginning in anterior temporal areas, followed by frontal and medial parietal areas, the remaining associative neocortex, and finally primary sensory-motor areas and subcortical regions.
- In conclusion, we provide a methodological refinement and longitudinal validation of PET-based staging of regional amyloid accumulation, which may help improving early detection and in-vivo stratification of pathologic disease progression in AD.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Participants403
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 59/100
Published in a peer-reviewed 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. 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, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 33 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Human brain mapping) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in 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 | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 403 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 | — / 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 32648624) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 33 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 59 out of 100. |
| Total | 59 / 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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “18f”
318 studies in the library carry the topic tag “18f”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 318 tagged studies.