Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Predicting future rates of tau accumulation on PET
Jack CR, Wiste HJ, Weigand SD, Therneau TM, Lowe VJ, Knopman DS, Botha H, Graff-Radford J et al.. Brain : a journal of neurology, 2020-10-01
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
In the cognitively unimpaired group, only higher baseline amyloid PET was a significant independent predictor of higher tau accumulation rates (P < 0.001). Higher rates of tau accumulation were associated with faster rates of cognitive decline in the cognitively unimpaired subgroup with abnormal amyloid PET (P = 0.03), but among the subgroup with normal amyloid PET. In the cognitively impaired group, younger age (P = 0.02), higher baseline amyloid PET (P = 0.05), APOE ε4 (P = 0.05), and better cognitive performance (P = 0.05) were significant independent predictors of higher tau accumulation rates. Among impaired individuals, faster cognitive decline was associated with faster rates of tau accumulation (P = 0.01). While we examined many possible predictor variables, our results indicate that screening of unimpaired individuals for potential inclusion in anti-tau trials may be straightforward because the only independent predictor of high tau rates was amyloidosis. In cognitively impaired individuals, imaging and clinical variables consistent with early onset Alzheimer's disease phenotype were associated with higher rates of tau PET accumulation suggesting this may be a highly advantageous group in which to conduct proof-of-concept clinical trials that target tau-related mechanisms. The nature of the dementia phenotype (amnestic versus non-amnestic) did not affect this conclusion.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Jack, C. R., Wiste, H. J., Weigand, S. D., Therneau, T. M., Lowe, V. J., Knopman, D. S., et al. (2020). Predicting future rates of tau accumulation on PET. Brain : a journal of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awaa248
Vancouver
Jack CR, Wiste HJ, Weigand SD, Therneau TM, Lowe VJ, Knopman DS, et al. Predicting future rates of tau accumulation on PET. Brain : a journal of neurology. 2020. doi:10.1093/brain/awaa248. PMID: 33094327.
BibTeX
@article{jack2020-33094327,
author = {Jack, C. R. and Wiste, H. J. and Weigand, S. D. and Therneau, T. M. and Lowe, V. J. and Knopman, D. S. and Botha, H. and Graff-Radford, J. and others},
title = {{Predicting future rates of tau accumulation on PET}},
journal = {Brain : a journal of neurology},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1093/brain/awaa248},
pmid = {33094327},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awaa248}
}
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
- In the cognitively unimpaired group, only higher baseline amyloid PET was a significant independent predictor of higher tau accumulation rates (P < 0.001).
- Higher rates of tau accumulation were associated with faster rates of cognitive decline in the cognitively unimpaired subgroup with abnormal amyloid PET (P = 0.03), but among the subgroup with normal amyloid PET.
- In the cognitively impaired group, younger age (P = 0.02), higher baseline amyloid PET (P = 0.05), APOE ε4 (P = 0.05), and better cognitive performance (P = 0.05) were significant independent predictors of higher tau accumulation rates.
- Among impaired individuals, faster cognitive decline was associated with faster rates of tau accumulation (P = 0.01).
- While we examined many possible predictor variables, our results indicate that screening of unimpaired individuals for potential inclusion in anti-tau trials may be straightforward because the only independent predictor of high tau rates was amyloidosis.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Participants203
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 53/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and 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 31 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 53 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Brain : a journal of 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 | 2 / 4 | 203 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 | — / 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 33094327) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 31 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 53 out of 100. |
| Total | 53 / 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 Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “18f”
319 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 319 tagged studies.