Matoush, Leonard

Importance Advances in Alzheimer disease (AD) have shifted research focus to earlier disease stages, necessitating more scalable approaches to identify cognitively unimpaired individuals with amyloid β (Aβ) pathology. Objective To assess the utility of plasma phosphorylated tau 217 (p-tau217) for classifying Aβ status in cognitively unimpaired individuals, both as a stand-alone test and in a 2-step approach where positive plasma results were confirmed using a second modality (Aβ positron emission tomography [PET] or cerebrospinal fluid [CSF]). Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional cohort study used data collected between June 2009 and March 2024. We included 2916 cognitively unimpaired participants from 12 international independent observational cohorts in the US, Europe, Australia, and Canada with available plasma p-tau217 levels and CSF or PET Aβ biomarkers. Performance comparisons between mass spectrometry and immunoassay-based p-tau217 measurements were also performed (n = 964). Exposures Plasma p-tau217 levels measured by immunoassay. Main Outcome and Measures Aβ status, determined by CSF or Aβ PET biomarkers. Results Participants had a mean (SD) age of 66.9 (9.9) years; 971 (33.3%) were Aβ positive by either CSF or PET, 1667 (57.2%) were women, and 1108 (38.1%) carried at least 1 APOE ε4 allele. As a stand-alone test, plasma p-tau217 achieved a positive predictive value (PPV) of 79% (95% CI, 74-84) and an overall accuracy of 81% (95% CI, 80-82). In a 2-step workflow, the PPV and accuracy significantly increased to 91% (95% CI, 86-95). While this approach required screening of 677 individuals with plasma p-tau217 to identify 100 Aβ-positive individuals, compared to 536 participants when using PET alone, it reduced the need for PET testing to 124. Immunoassays demonstrated comparable PPVs to mass spectrometry (80% [95% CI, 74-86] vs 85% [95% CI, 81-90]; P = .12) but significantly lower overall accuracy (82% [95% CI, 79-84]% vs 88 [95% CI, 86-90]; P < .001) and true Aβ-positive detection rate (49% [95% CI, 43-55] vs 69% [95% CI, 64-75]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance The findings highlight the potential of plasma p-tau217 as a stand-alone test—or when used in a sequential 2-step approach alongside PET or CSF testing—as a cost-effective, scalable, and minimally burdensome strategy for identifying preclinical AD. Tailored screening workflows that incorporate p-tau217 can improve efficiency in participant selection for preclinical AD trials and, in the future, help guide access to disease-modifying treatments.

AbstractBackgroundRecent advances in automatic face recognition have increased the risk that de‐identified research imaging data could be re‐identified from face imagery in brain scans.MethodAn ADNI committee of independent imaging experts evaluated 11 published techniques for face‐deidentification (“de‐facing”) and selected four algorithms (FSL‐UK Biobank, HCP/XNAT, mri_reface, and BIC) for formal testing using 183 longitudinal scans of 61 racially and ethnically diverse ADNI participants, evaluated by their facial feature removal on 3D rendered surfaces (confirming sufficient privacy protection) and by comparing measurements from ADNI routine image analyses on unmodified vs. de‐faced images (confirming negligible side effects on analyses).ResultEffects of the de‐facing methods on FreeSurfer at UCSF (Figure 1‐top), ASHS at University of Pennsylvania (Figure 1 bottom‐left), and longitudinal atrophy at Mayo Clinic (Figure 1 bottom‐right) were comparable with each other and sufficiently small vs. unmodified scans to recommend de‐facing in ADNI‐4. The FSL and mri_reface methods were more thorough in removing facial features, partly because these also removed ears (Figure 2‐top). mri_reface was recommended for ADNI‐4 primarily because fewer (zero) images had modified brain (Figure 2‐bottom), and ADNI leadership approved de‐facing with mri_reface. ADNI performed a second validation of its latest version on another diverse sample of 100 ADNI‐3 participants. These analyses included: boundary shift interval at University College London, where average differences in measurements were all <0.05%; cortical white matter hyperintensities at UC Davis, where they found “minimum impact” (R>0.97); and others.ConclusionADNI‐4 de‐faces all indicated image types (Table 1) before subsequent pre‐processing, analyses, and public release. Sites upload images to the central repository (LONI), where they are queued to the MRI Core at Mayo Clinic for de‐facing. Image types requiring de‐facing are de‐faced using mri_reface. Trained analysts inspect de‐faced images to confirm complete removal of the face and complete non‐modification of the brain, and any flagged images are re‐processed manually until issues are resolved. De‐faced images are converted back to DICOM and re‐uploaded for further distribution. Image types not requiring de‐facing are indicated to proceed directly to subsequent steps. In summary, ADNI‐4 has adopted mri_reface because it successfully de‐faces without substantially affecting brain measurements.

AbstractBackgroundRecent advances in automatic face recognition have increased the risk that de‐identified research imaging data could be re‐identified from face imagery in brain scans.MethodAn ADNI committee of independent imaging experts evaluated 11 published techniques for face‐deidentification (“de‐facing”) and selected four algorithms (FSL‐UK Biobank, HCP/XNAT, mri_reface, and BIC) for formal testing using 183 longitudinal scans of 61 racially and ethnically diverse ADNI participants, evaluated by their facial feature removal on 3D rendered surfaces (confirming sufficient privacy protection) and by comparing measurements from ADNI routine image analyses on unmodified vs. de‐faced images (confirming negligible side effects on analyses).ResultEffects of the de‐facing methods on FreeSurfer at UCSF (Figure 1‐top), ASHS at University of Pennsylvania (Figure 1 bottom‐left), and longitudinal atrophy at Mayo Clinic (Figure 1 bottom‐right) were comparable with each other and sufficiently small vs. unmodified scans to recommend de‐facing in ADNI‐4. The FSL and mri_reface methods were more thorough in removing facial features, partly because these also removed ears (Figure 2‐top). mri_reface was recommended for ADNI‐4 primarily because fewer (zero) images had modified brain (Figure 2‐bottom), and ADNI leadership approved de‐facing with mri_reface. ADNI performed a second validation of its latest version on another diverse sample of 100 ADNI‐3 participants. These analyses included: boundary shift interval at University College London, where average differences in measurements were all <0.05%; cortical white matter hyperintensities at UC Davis, where they found “minimum impact” (R>0.97); and others.ConclusionADNI‐4 de‐faces all indicated image types (Table 1) before subsequent pre‐processing, analyses, and public release. Sites upload images to the central repository (LONI), where they are queued to the MRI Core at Mayo Clinic for de‐facing. Image types requiring de‐facing are de‐faced using mri_reface. Trained analysts inspect de‐faced images to confirm complete removal of the face and complete non‐modification of the brain, and any flagged images are re‐processed manually until issues are resolved. De‐faced images are converted back to DICOM and re‐uploaded for further distribution. Image types not requiring de‐facing are indicated to proceed directly to subsequent steps. In summary, ADNI‐4 has adopted mri_reface because it successfully de‐faces without substantially affecting brain measurements.

AbstractINTRODUCTIONRecent technological advances have increased the risk that de‐identified brain images could be re‐identified from face imagery. The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) is a leading source of publicly available de‐identified brain imaging, who quickly acted to protect participants’ privacy.METHODSAn independent expert committee evaluated 11 face‐deidentification (“de‐facing”) methods and selected four for formal testing.RESULTSEffects of de‐facing on brain measurements were comparable across methods and sufficiently small to recommend de‐facing in ADNI. The committee ultimately recommended mri_reface for advantages in reliability, and for some practical considerations. ADNI leadership approved the committee's recommendation, beginning in ADNI4.DISCUSSIONADNI4 de‐faces all applicable brain images before subsequent pre‐processing, analyses, and public release. Trained analysts inspect de‐faced images to confirm complete face removal and complete non‐modification of brain. This paper details the history of the algorithm selection process and extensive validation, then describes the production workflows for de‐facing in ADNI.Highlights ADNI is implementing “de‐facing” of MRI and PET beginning in ADNI4. “De‐facing” alters face imagery in brain images to help protect privacy. Four algorithms were extensively compared for ADNI and mri_reface was chosen. Validation confirms mri_reface is robust and effective for ADNI sequences. Validation confirms mri_reface negligibly affects ADNI brain measurements.