Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
MRI and flortaucipir relationships in Alzheimer's phenotypes are heterogeneous
Keith A Josephs, Nirubol Tosakulwong, Jonathan Graff-Radford, Stephen D Weigand, Marina Buciuc, Mary M Machulda, David T Jones, Christopher G Schwarz et al.. Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2020-04-15
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
For 50-59 greater medial temporal atrophy and flortaucipir uptake was observed in the typical compared with atypical phenotype. The typical phenotype also showed greater frontal neocortex uptake with the voxel-level analysis. For 60-69 and 70+ there was greater hippocampal volume loss in the typical compared with atypical phenotype while only the 60-69, but not the 70+ group, showed a difference in hippocampal flortaucipir uptake. We also observed a pattern for higher neocortical flortaucipir uptake to correlate with younger age decade for both phenotypes. MRI volumetry versus flortaucipir PET relationships differ across Alzheimer's clinical phenotypes, and also within phenotype across age decades. This suggests that there is potential risk of masked effects by not accounting for genarian in participants with beta-amyloid and tau-positive biomarker defined Alzheimer's disease.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Josephs, K. A., Tosakulwong, N., Graff-Radford, J., Weigand, S. D., Buciuc, M., Machulda, M. M., et al. (2020). MRI and flortaucipir relationships in Alzheimer's phenotypes are heterogeneous. Annals of clinical and translational neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.51038
Vancouver
Josephs KA, Tosakulwong N, Graff-Radford J, Weigand SD, Buciuc M, Machulda MM, et al. MRI and flortaucipir relationships in Alzheimer's phenotypes are heterogeneous. Annals of clinical and translational neurology. 2020. doi:10.1002/acn3.51038. PMID: 32293805.
BibTeX
@article{josephs2020-32293805,
author = {Josephs, Keith A and Tosakulwong, Nirubol and Graff-Radford, Jonathan and Weigand, Stephen D and Buciuc, Marina and Machulda, Mary M and Jones, David T and Schwarz, Christopher G and others},
title = {{MRI and flortaucipir relationships in Alzheimer's phenotypes are heterogeneous}},
journal = {Annals of clinical and translational neurology},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1002/acn3.51038},
pmid = {32293805},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.51038}
}
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
- For 50-59 greater medial temporal atrophy and flortaucipir uptake was observed in the typical compared with atypical phenotype.
- The typical phenotype also showed greater frontal neocortex uptake with the voxel-level analysis.
- For 60-69 and 70+ there was greater hippocampal volume loss in the typical compared with atypical phenotype while only the 60-69, but not the 70+ group, showed a difference in hippocampal flortaucipir uptake.
- We also observed a pattern for higher neocortical flortaucipir uptake to correlate with younger age decade for both phenotypes.
- MRI volumetry versus flortaucipir PET relationships differ across Alzheimer's clinical phenotypes, and also within phenotype across age decades.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Participants86
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 46/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 26 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 46 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Annals of clinical and translational neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 86 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 32293805) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 26 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 26 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 46 out of 100. |
| Total | 46 / 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 “diffusion”
172 studies in the library carry the topic tag “diffusion”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 172 tagged studies.