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 38 out of 100. Brain scans and imaging

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Purpose The A/T/N model is a research framework proposed to investigate Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathological bases (i.e., amyloidosis A, neurofibrillary tangles T, and neurodegeneration N). The application of this system on clinical populations is still limited. The aim of the study is to evaluate the topography of T distribution by 18F-flortaucipir PET in relation to A and N and to describe the A/T/N status through imaging biomarkers in memory clinic patients. Methods Eighty-one patients with subjective and objective cognitive impairment were classified as A+/A- and N+/N- through amyloid PET and structural MRI. Tau deposition was compared across A/N subgroups at voxel level. T status was defined through a global cut point based on A/N subgroups and subjects were categorized following the A/T/N model. Results A+N+ and A+N- subgroups showed higher tau burden compared to A-N- group, with A+N- showing significant deposition limited to the medial and lateral temporal regions. Global cut point discriminated A+N+ and A+N- from A-N- subjects. On A/T/N classification, 23% of patients showed a negative biomarker profile, 58% fell within the Alzheimer's continuum, and 19% of the sample was characterized by non-AD pathologic change. Conclusion Medial and lateral temporal regions represent a site of significant tau accumulation in A+ subjects and possibly a useful marker of early clinical changes. This is the first study in which the A/T/N model is applied using 18F-flortaucipir PET in a memory clinic population. The majority of patients showed a profile consistent with the Alzheimer's continuum, while a minor percentage showed a profile suggestive of possible other neurodegenerative diseases. These results support the applicability of the A/T/N model in clinical practice.

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

APA 7th

Dodich, A., Mendes, A., Assal, F., Chicherio, C., Rakotomiaramanana, B., Andryszak, P., et al. (2020). The A/T/N model applied through imaging biomarkers in a memory clinic. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04536-9

Vancouver

Dodich A, Mendes A, Assal F, Chicherio C, Rakotomiaramanana B, Andryszak P, et al. The A/T/N model applied through imaging biomarkers in a memory clinic. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2020. doi:10.1007/s00259-019-04536-9. PMID: 31792573.

BibTeX

@article{dodich2020-31792573,
  author  = {Dodich, A. and Mendes, A. and Assal, F. and Chicherio, C. and Rakotomiaramanana, B. and Andryszak, P. and Festari, C. and Ribaldi, F. and others},
  title   = {{The A/T/N model applied through imaging biomarkers in a memory clinic}},
  journal = {European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging},
  year    = {2020},
  doi     = {10.1007/s00259-019-04536-9},
  pmid    = {31792573},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04536-9}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 38/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 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 0 of 2. 22 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 38 of 100. Total 38 of 100.22 of the 58 points we could judge = 38 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging)
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 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 31792573)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 22 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100.
Total 38 / 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 “imaging-biomarkers”

2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “imaging-biomarkers”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Brain scans and imaging

See all studies in Brain scans and imaging →