Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Unsupervised [18F]Flortaucipir cutoffs for tau positivity and staging in Alzheimer's disease
Giulia Quattrini, Clarissa Ferrari, Michela Pievani, Andrea Geviti, Federica Ribaldi, Max Scheffler, Giovanni B Frisoni, Valentina Garibotto et al.. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2023-06-05
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
GMM-based cutoffs classified less subjects as T+, mainly in the A- CN (<3.4% vs >28.5%) and A+ CN (<14.5% vs >42.9%) groups and showed higher agreement with visual rating (ICC=0.91 vs ICC<0.62) than published cutoffs. We provided reliable data-driven [18F]Flortaucipir cutoffs for in vivo T+ detection in AD. These cutoffs might be useful to select participants in clinical and research studies.
Key findings
- GMM-based cutoffs classified less subjects as T+, mainly in the A- CN (<3.4% vs >28.5%) and A+ CN (<14.5% vs >42.9%) groups and showed higher agreement with visual rating (ICC=0.91 vs ICC<0.62) than published cutoffs.
- We provided reliable data-driven [18F]Flortaucipir cutoffs for in vivo T+ detection in AD.
- These cutoffs might be useful to select participants in clinical and research studies.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Participants269
- Effect size3.4%; 28.5%; 14.5%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 54/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 54 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 269 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 37272955) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 30 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 54 out of 100. |
| Total | 54 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Quattrini, G., Ferrari, C., Pievani, M., Geviti, A., Ribaldi, F., Scheffler, M., et al. (2023). Unsupervised [18F]Flortaucipir cutoffs for tau positivity and staging in Alzheimer's disease. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-023-06280-7
Vancouver
Quattrini G, Ferrari C, Pievani M, Geviti A, Ribaldi F, Scheffler M, et al. Unsupervised [18F]Flortaucipir cutoffs for tau positivity and staging in Alzheimer's disease. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2023. doi:10.1007/s00259-023-06280-7. PMID: 37272955.
BibTeX
@article{quattrini2023-37272955,
author = {Quattrini, Giulia and Ferrari, Clarissa and Pievani, Michela and Geviti, Andrea and Ribaldi, Federica and Scheffler, Max and Frisoni, Giovanni B and Garibotto, Valentina and others},
title = {{Unsupervised [18F]Flortaucipir cutoffs for tau positivity and staging in Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1007/s00259-023-06280-7},
pmid = {37272955},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-023-06280-7}
}
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “blood-based”
698 studies in the library carry the topic tag “blood-based”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 698 tagged studies.