Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

11 citation(s) found for "Xie, Fang".

Amyloid PET Quantitation and Centiloid Thresholds in the Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease
Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Chiotis, Konstantinos, Allen, Isabel E., Rabinovici, Gil D., Joie, Renaud La , Group, Meta-Centiloid Study, Apostolova, Liana G. , Asken, Breton M., Benzinger, Th., Betthauser, Tobey J., Bluma, Marina, Bombois, Stephanie, Bourgeat, Pierrick, Bouteloup, Vincent , Braskie, Meredith N., Brendel, Matthias, Brickman, Adam M., Bryant, Natalie, Bullich, Santiago , Carrillo, Maria C., Casaletto, Kaitlin, Cash, David M., Chang, Chiung-Chih, CHANG, H L, Chao, Yishu , Collij, Lyduine E., Corrada, Maria M., Craft, Suzanne , Dickerson, Bradford C., Dubois, Bruno, Dufouil, Carole, Fajardo, Alfonso, Farrar, Gill , Fortea, Juan, Frings, Lars , Frisoni, Giovanni B., Gardner, Raquel C., Gnörich, Johannes , Gordon, Brian A., Gu, Yuna , Guan, Yihui, Guo, Tengfei, Hanseeuw, Bernard J., Hansson, Oskar, Harrison, Theresa M., Huang, Qi, Huang, ST , Iaccarino, Leonardo, Ishii, Kazunari, Ishi, Kenji, Jagust, William J., Johnson, Sterling C., Kato, Takashi, Katsumi, Yuta, Kaye, Jeffrey, Kolinger, Guilherme D., Kramer, Joel H. , Landau, Susan M., Landeau, Brigitte, Lao, Patrick J., Lee, Sangwon, Lopresti, Brian J., Lowe, Val J. , Luchsinger, José A., Mao, Xiaoxie, March, Andrew, Masters, Colin L., Meyer, Philipp T., Mezenge, Florence, Mormino, Elizabeth C., Franquesa‐Mullerat, María , Nakamura, Akinori, Nordberg, Agneta, O’Brien, John T., O’Bryant, Sid E., Pappas, Ioannis, Peretti, Debora E., Rowe, Christopher C., Rowe, James B., Schwartz, Daniel L., Seo, Sang Won , Shekari, Mahnaz, Smith, Ruben, Snyder, Heather M. , Sokolowski, Andrzej, Sperling, Reisa A., Sun, Pan, Taggett, Jacinda Z., Touroutoglou, Alexandra , Vaillancourt, David E., Giessen, Elsmarieke van de, Vijverberg, Jort, Villemagne, Victor L. , Villeneuve, Sylvia , Wang, Wei-en, Weiner, Michael, Woodworth, Davis, Xiao, Cally , Xie, F, Yoon, Yeojun, Yun, Mijin, Severanc, A4, ABIDE, ADNI*, ADNI-DoD, AgeWell, AIBL, AMYPAD, BACS, BATON, BIOCARD, BLSA, BioFINDER-2, BrANCH, CPAS, DETECT-AD, GEMS, GHABS, HABS, HABS-HD, IDEAS, IMAP, INSIGHT-preAD, Insight46, K-ROAD, LEADS, MCSA, MULNIAD, MEMENTO, SCAN, PREVENT-AD, SPIN,, Corrada, María M. , La Joie, Renaud , Blazhenets, Ganna , Chiotis, Konstantinos , Allen, Isabel Elaine , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Asken, Breton M. , Bejanin, Alexandre , Benzinger, Tammie L.S. , Betthauser, Tobey J. , Blūma, Marina , Bombois, Stéphanie , Bourgeat, Pierrick , Braskie, Meredith N. , Brendel, Matthias , Brickman, Adam M. , Carrillo, María C. , Casaletto, Kaitlin B. , Cash, David M. , Chang, Chiung‐Chih , Chang, Hsin‐I , Chêne, Geneviève , Chételat, Gaël , Coath, William , Collij, Lyduine , Colmant, Lise , Dickerson, Bradford Clark , Dubois, Bruno , Dufouil, Carole , Fortea, Juan , Garibotto, Valentina , Gordon, Brian A. , Guan, Yihui , Guo, Tengfei , Hanseeuw, Bernard , Hansson, Oskar , Harrison, Theresa M. , Iaccarino, Leonardo , Ishii, Kazunari , Ishii, Kenji, Jagust, William J. , Johnson, Sterling C. , Katsumi, Yuta , Kaye, Jeffrey , Koeppe, Robert A. , Kolinger, Guilherme Domingues , Landau, Susan , Landeau, Brigitte , Lao, Patrick , Lee, Sangwon, Lleó, Alberto , Lopresti, Brian J. , Malpetti, Maura , March, Andrew, Masters, Colin L. , Mézenge, Florence, Mormino, Elizabeth C. , Nakamura, Akinori , Nordberg, Agneta , O'Brien, John Tiernan , O’Bryant, Sid E. , Pappas, Ioannis , Quenon, Lisa , Rowe, Christopher Cleon , Rowe, James B. , Rudolph, Marc D. , Salvadó, Gemma , Schott, Jonathan M. , Schwarz, Christopher G. , Shekari, Mahnaz , Silbert, Lisa C. , Smith, Ruben, Sokolowski, Andrzej, Sperling, Reisa Anne , Sun, Pan , Taggett, Jacinda , Toga, Arthur W. , Vaillancourt, David E. , Giessen, Elsmarieke van de , Vemuri, Prashanthi , Villain, Nicolas , Wang, Wei‐en , Weiner, Michael W. , Xie, Fang , Young, Christina B. , Yun, M R

JAMA | July 13, 2026 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1001/jama.2026.13116 | PMID 42441390 Get It

Importance Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) is increasingly used in research and clinical settings to determine the etiology of cognitive decline and eligibility for amyloid-targeting therapies. To assist with amyloid PET evaluation and to guide clinical decision-making, images can be quantified in a standardized unit called Centiloid, the interpretation of which can vary according to the method and threshold used. Objective To collect Centiloid values from available studies and determine robust positivity cutoffs using data-driven methods and correspondence with visual reads. Data Sources PubMed search (October 2024) identified studies with Centiloid values. Corresponding authors were invited to share individual participant data. Additional data were obtained through access-controlled repositories and conference outreach (July 2024-July 2025). Study Selection Studies were included if they provided Centiloids, radiotracer, age, and sex. Data Extraction and Synthesis Each study was analyzed using a unified statistical pipeline; study estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures Gaussian mixture models (GMMs) were fitted to Centiloid values for each study. In studies with a bimodal distribution (per integrated completed likelihood), single cutoffs for positivity were set as mean plus 2 SDs of the lower gaussian component. Using GMMs, a double-cutoff approach defined a lower certainty range using a 90% posterior probability cutoff for assignment to the low (amyloid-negative) vs high (amyloid-positive) component. An alternative Centiloid cutoff was derived from maximizing the correspondence (Cohen κ) with the binary visual reads when available. Results This meta-analysis included cross-sectional amyloid PET scans acquired with 5 radiotracers from 49 227 participants across 53 studies from 15 countries (mean age, 71 years; 54% female, 62% cognitively impaired). The data-driven GMM approach identified a bimodal distribution in 51 studies (n = 48 786), resulting in a single cutoff for positivity of 18 Centiloids (95% CI,16-19; I 2 = 97%). The double-cutoff approach revealed high confidence for interpreting scans as negative when Centiloid values were lower than 11 (95% CI, 9-13; I 2 = 95%) and interpreting scans as positive if Centiloid values were higher than 26 (95% CI, 24-28; I 2 = 95%). In analyses of correspondence with binary (positive or negative) visual reads of amyloid PET scans (n = 35 045; 36 studies), Centiloids were highly predictive of visual positivity (Cohen κ, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.89; I 2 = 96%) with a cutoff of 27 Centiloids (95% CI, 24-30; I 2 = 80%). Conclusions and Relevance In this individual participant data meta-analysis, positivity cutoffs converged around 18 Centiloids (data-driven) and 27 Centiloids (visual reads). Findings from a double-cutoff analysis suggest that scans in the 11 to 26 Centiloid range should be interpreted with caution depending on the context of use.
Every Centiloid, from Everywhere, All at Once
Snyder, Heather M. , Apostolova, Liana G., Asken, Breton M., Bombois, Stéphanie, Bourgeat, Pierrick, Braskie, Meredith N., Carrillo, Maria C., Casaletto, Kaitlin B, Cash, David M, Chang, Hsin‐I., Chao, Yishu , Chételat, Gael, Collij, Lyduine E., Dickerson, Brad C., Dubois, Bruno, Valdez, Alfonso Fajardo, Farrar, Gill , Fortea, Juan M., Frisoni, Giovanni B, Gu, Yuna , Guo, Tengfei, Hanseeuw, Bernard J, Hansson, Oskar H., Harrison, Theresa, Huang, Qi, Huang, Shu‐Hua , Ishii, K, Ishii, Kenji, Jagust, William J., Katou, Rikio, Koeppe, Robert A., Kramer, Joel H, Landau, Susan M., Landeau, Brigitte, Lee, Sangwon, Lopresti, Brian J, Lowe, Val J. , Mao, Xiaoxie, March, Andrew, Masters, Colin L., Mézenge, Florence, Mormino, Elizabeth C., Franquesa‐Mullerat, María , Nakamura, Akinori, O'Bryant, Sid E., Pappas, Ioannis, Rowe, Christopher C., Salvadó, Gemma, Schott, Jonathan M, Schwartz, Daniel, Schwarz, Christopher G, Seo, Sang Won, Shekari, Mahnaz , Silbert, Lisa C, Smith, Ruben, Sokolowski, Andrzej, Soleimani‐Meigooni, David, Sperling, Reisa A., Sun, Pan , Toga, Arthur W., Vaillancourt, D., Giessen, Elsmarieke van de, Flier, Wiesje M. van der, Vemuri, Prashanthi, Villemagne, Victor L., Villeneuve, Sylvia , Wang, Wei‐En, Weiner, Michael S. W., Xiao, Cally , Xie, Fang, Yoon, Yeojun, Yun, M R , Rabinovici, Gil D., Joie, Renaud La, Consortia, AMYPAD and LEADS, Blazhenets, Ganna , Apostolova, Liana G. , Asken, Breton M. , Bejanin, Alexandre , Bombois, Stéphanie , Bourgeat, Pierrick , Braskie, Meredith N. , Carrillo, María C. , Casaletto, Kaitlin B. , Cash, David M. , Chang, Chia‐Hsuin , Chang, Hsin‐I , Chételat, Gaël , Coath, William , Collij, Lyduine , Colmant, Lise , Dickerson, Bradford Clark , Dubois, Bruno , Fortea, Juan , Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Gardner, Raquel C. , Garibotto, Valentina , Guo, Tengfei , Hanseeuw, Bernard , Hansson, Oskar , Harrison, Theresa M. , Ishii, Kenji, Jagust, William J. , Koeppe, Robert A. , Kramer, Joel H. , Landau, Susan , Landeau, Brigitte , Lee, Sangwon, Lopresti, Brian J. , March, Andrew, Masters, Colin L. , Mézenge, Florence, Mormino, Elizabeth C. , Nakamura, Akinori , O’Bryant, Sid E. , Pappas, Ioannis , Peretti, Débora Elisa , Quenon, Lisa , Rowe, Christopher C., Salvadó, Gemma , Schott, Jonathan M. , Schwartz, Daniel L., Schwarz, Christopher G. , Seo, Sang Won , Shekari, Mahnaz , Silbert, Lisa C. , Smith, Ruben, Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Sperling, Reisa Anne , Sun, Pan , Toga, Arthur W. , Vaillancourt, David E. , Giessen, Elsmarieke van de , Flier, Wiesje M. van der , Vemuri, Prashanthi , Villain, Nicolas , Villemagne, Victor L. , Weiner, Michael W. , Xie, Fang , Young, Christina B. , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Joie, Renaud La

Alzheimer's & Dementia | January 9, 2026 | Volume: 21 | Issue: S2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz70856_107124 Get It

Abstract Background Ten years after the original publication, the Centiloid framework is now broadly used to harmonize amyloid‐PET quantification, facilitate data sharing and comparison across cohorts, and even assist visual interpretation in clinical settings. We evaluated the global implementation of Centiloids by comparing their distribution and corresponding positivity thresholds across cohorts. Methods We gathered data from publicly available cohorts and reached out to investigators across the world to collect cross‐sectional Centiloids, demographic and clinical information, and visual read data. Gaussian mixture models (GMM, k=2) were fitted to Centiloid values for each cohort and cutoffs were calculated as mean + 2SD of the lower Gaussian. When visual reads were available, we determined Centiloid cutoffs that maximized correspondence with visual reads (Cohen's kappa). Data was combined across cohorts using random effects meta‐analyses. Results As of January 2025, we included 37 cohorts ( n = 41,678 participants) with heterogeneous pipelines, radiotracers, and clinical and demographic characteristics (Table‐1). The low Gaussian peaks ranged from ‐9 to 10CL; the meta‐analysis identified a common peak at 1CL. The second peaks were more heterogeneous (range=38‐102CL; meta‐analysis outcome=64CL). Across cohorts, the proportion of cognitively unimpaired versus impaired participants impacted the position of both peaks, with better separation in cohorts enriched in impaired individuals (Figure 1C). The meta‐analysis indicated a GMM‐based cutoff of 19CL (95%CI: 16‐21CL, Figure 1B); subgroup analyses showed no evidence of significant effect between single versus multicenter settings (17 versus 20CL, p = 0.30), MRI‐based or PET‐only processing (18 versus 19CL, p = 0.88), and no evidence of difference across radiotracers (Flutemetamol: 16CL; PIB: 17CL, Flutafuranol: 18CL, Florbetaben: 19CL, Florbetapir: 20CL, p = 0.78). In a subset of 29,496 participants with visual reads available, binary visual reads corresponded well to Centiloids (common kappa=0.86, Figure 2A). The visual read‐based cutoff of 24CL (95%CI: 21‐27CL, Figure 2B) maximized correspondence between visual read and quantification and was slightly higher than the GMM‐based cutoff. All meta‐analysis models showed high non‐random heterogeneity (I 2 >80%) across studies, suggesting non‐random differences in peaks and cutoffs. Conclusions Meta‐analysis‐based cutoffs align well with thresholds from the existing literature. High heterogeneity among studies underscores the need to investigate contributing factors, raising concerns about applying common cutoffs.
Sex, education and race/ethnicity have distinct effects on amyloid and tau‐PET status
Groot, Colin , Rowe, Christopher C., Giessen, Elsmarieke van de, Flier, Wiesje M. van der, Pijnenburg, Yolande A.L., Visser, Pieter Jelle, Braber, Anouk den, Pontecorvo, Michael J. , Burnham, Samantha C., Lu, Ming , Jagust, William J., Baker, Suzanne L. , Harrison, Theresa, Gispert, Juan Domingo, Shekari, Mahnaz , Minguillón, Carolina, Smith, Ruben, Mattsson‐Carlgren, Niklas, Palmqvist, Sebastian, Strandberg, Olof, Stomrud, Erik, Brickman, Adam, Manly, Jennifer J., Lao, Patrick J., Kreisl, William Charles, Malpetti, Maura, O'Brien, John T, Jäger, Elena, Bischof, Gérard, Drzezga, Alexander, Xie, Fang, Mao, Xiaoxie, Guan, Yihui, Frisoni, Giovanni B, Peretti, Débora Elisa , Skoog, I., Kern, Silke, Sperling, Reisa A., Johnson, Keith A., Risacher, Shannon, Saykin, Andrew J., Carrillo, Maria C., Dickerson, Brad C., Apostolova, Liana G., Rabinovici, Gil D., Barthel, H, Messerschmidt, Konstantin, Vandenberghe, Rik, Laere, Koen J. Van, Spruyt, Laure , Petersen, Ronald, Jack, Clifford R., Franzmeier, Nicolai, Brendel, Matthias, Gnörich, Johannes, Benzinger, Tammie L.S., Lagarde, Julien, Sarazin, Marie , Villeneuve, Sylvia , Poirier, Judes, Seo, Sang Won, Gu, Yuna , Kim, Jun Pyo, Mormino, Beth C., Vossler, Hillary , Rosa‐Neto, Pedro, Therriault, Joseph, Rahmouni, Nesrine, Cash, David M, Schott, Jonathan M, Hanseeuw, Bernard J, Jansen, Willemijn J. , Joie, Renaud La, Rosen, Howard J., Johnson, Sterling C., Christian, Bradley T, Betthauser, Tobey J., Landau, Susan M., O'Bryant, Sid E., Hansson, Oskar H., Ossenkoppele, Rik, Prevent‐AD, ADNI, ADNI‐DOD, A‐Study, MCSA,, O’Brien, John T. , O'Brien, John Tiernan , Groot, Colin , Coomans, Emma M. , Rowe, Christopher C., Doré, Vincent , Feizpour, Azadeh , Giessen, Elsmarieke van de , Flier, Wiesje M. van der , Pijnenburg, Yolande A.L. , Visser, Pieter Jelle , Braber, Anouk den , Burnham, Samantha C. , Kennedy, Ian Andrew , Jagust, William J. , Harrison, Theresa M. , Gispert, Juan Domingo , Shekari, Mahnaz , Minguillón, Carolina , Smith, Ruben, Mattsson, Niklas , Palmqvist, Sebastian , Strandberg, Olof, Stomrud, Erik , Brickman, Adam M. , Luchsinger, Jose Alejandro , Manly, Jennifer J. , Lao, Patrick , Malpetti, Maura , Rowe, James B. , Bischof, Gérard N. , Drzezga, Alexander E. , Xie, Fang , Guan, Yihui , Garibotto, Valentina , Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Schöll, Michael , Kern, Silke , Sperling, Reisa Anne , Johnson, Keith A. , Risacher, Shannon L. , Saykin, Andrew J. , Carrillo, María C. , Dickerson, Bradford Clark , Apostolova, Liana G. , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Rullmann, Michael , Messerschmidt, Konstantin, Vandenberghe, Rik , Petersen, Ronald, Jack, Clifford R. , Franzmeier, Nicolai , Brendel, Matthias , Gnörich, Johannes , Benzinger, Tammie L.S. , Lagarde, Julien , Bottlaender, Michel , Poirier, Judes , Seo, Sang Won , Kim, Jun Pyo, Young, Christina B. , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Therriault, Joseph , Rahmouni, Nesrine , Coath, William , Cash, David M. , Schott, Jonathan M. , Hanseeuw, Bernard , Salman, Yasmine , Malotaux, Vincent , Joie, Renaud La , Rosen, Howard J. , Johnson, Sterling C. , Christian, Bradley T. , Betthauser, Tobey J. , Landau, Susan , O’Bryant, Sid E. , Hansson, Oskar , Ossenkoppele, Rik

Alzheimer's & Dementia | January 8, 2026 | Volume: 21 | Issue: S2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz70856_105387 Get It

Abstract Background Sex, education and race/ethnicity are all associated with risk of Alzheimer's disease dementia. Here, we assess the effects of self‐reported sex, educational attainment and race/ethnicity on amyloid‐positivity, and tau‐PET‐positivity in 12,048 (7,394 cognitively unimpaired [CU], 2,177 MCI, and 2,477 dementia) individuals from 42 cohorts worldwide. Method Logistic generalized estimating equations were used to estimate frequency of amyloid‐positivity (using cohort‐specific thresholds for amyloid‐PET [84%] or CSF) and tau‐PET‐positivity (cohort‐specific thresholds of 2SD above mean temporal uptake in amyloid‐negative controls). We assessed: i) sex and APOEε4 ( N = 10,098) associations, to complement earlier findings of a higher frequency of tau‐positivity in females, ii) effects of lower/higher education ( N = 10,970; cohort‐specific median‐split), and iii) effects of race/ethnicity (non‐Hispanic White [hereafter: White], N = 4880; Asian, N = 116; Black or African‐American [hereafter: Black], N = 353; Hispanic, N = 356, only from Northern‐American cohorts). Outcomes were frequency of amyloid‐positivity in CU individuals only, and tau‐PET‐positivity in both amyloid‐positive (AB+) CU and cognitively impaired (CI, i.e. MCI and dementia) individuals. Interaction effects on the relationship between age and amyloid/tau‐positivity were assessed and only retained in the models when significant. Result Female sex was associated with an APOEε4 ‐independent increased frequency of amyloid‐positivity (β=0.51[0.22], p = 0.02) in CU and increase of tau‐positivity in both AB+CU (β=0.27[0.08]) and AB+CI (β=0.37[0.08], both p <0.01). Remarkably, tau‐positivity frequencies of female APOEε4 non‐carriers were equivalent to male APOEε4 carriers in AB+CI (Figure 1). No significant sex* APOE interactions were observed. In CU, higher education was associated with lower amyloid‐positivity frequency (β=‐0.12[0.05], p = 0.02). In contrast, among AB+CU, there was an age*education interaction effect that indicated more pronounced age effects on tau‐positivity in individuals with higher education (age*education:β interaction =0.03[0.01], p <0.01). There were no education effects in AB+CI (Figure 2). In CU, an age*race/ethnicity interaction effect was observed across all non‐White groups compared to White (Hispanic:β interaction =‐0.05[0.01], p <0.01; Black:‐0.04[0.01], p <0.01; Asian:‐0.02[0.01], p = 0.04). This suggests that the impact of age on amyloid‐positivity was less pronounced in non‐White groups. Furthermore, in AB+CI, Hispanic ethnicity was related to higher tau‐positivity frequency than White (β=0.51[0.22], p = 0.02; Figure 3). Conclusion In this multi‐center initiative comprised of clinical and community‐based cohorts, we observed that self‐reported sex, educational attainment and race/ethnicity were related to positivity‐frequencies of Alzheimer's disease pathology.
External Validation of Joint Propagation Model‐Based Tau PET CenTauR units
Leuzy, Antoine , Raket, Lars Lau, Villemagne, Victor L., Klein, Gregory , Tonietto, Matteo, Olafson, Emily, Baker, Suzanne L. , Saad, Ziad S., Bullich, Santiago , Lopresti, Brian J. , Sanabria, Sandra , Boada, Mercè, Charil, A., Collins, Emily C., Collins, Jessica, Higuchi, Makoto, Hostetler, Eric D., Hutchison, R. Matthew, Iaccarino, Leonardo, Insel, Philip S., Irizarry, Michael C., Jack, Clifford R., Jagust, William J., Johnson, Keith A., Johnson, Sterling C., Karten, Yashmin, Marquié, Marta, Mathotaarachchi, Sulantha , Mintun, Mark A., Huang, Qi, Mao, Xiaxie, Gnörich, Johannes , Pappas, Ioannis, Petersen, Ronald, Chiotis, Konstantinos, Rabinovici, Gil D., Rosa‐Neto, Pedro, Schwarz, Christopher G, Smith, Ruben, Stephens, Andrew W., Whittington, Alex , Carrillo, M., Pontecorvo, Michael J. , Haeberlein, Samantha Budd , Dunn, Billy , Stephenson, Diane , Tatton, Nadine , Brendel, Matthias, Xie, Fang, Hansson, Oskar H., Rial, Alexis Moscoso , Rakêt, Lars Lau , Villemagne, Victor L. , Tonietto, Mattéo , Olafson, Emily, Lutz, Olivia , Boada, Merce , Betthauser, Tobey J. , Collins, Emily C. , Collins, Jessica, Gunn, Roger N. , Higuchi, Makoto, Hutchison, R. Matthew , Iaccarino, Leonardo , Insel, Philip S. , Irizarry, Michael C. , Jack, Clifford R. , Jagust, William J. , Johnson, Keith A. , Johnson, Sterling C. , Marquié, Marta , Ossenkoppele, Rik , Pappas, Ioannis , Petersen, Ronald C. , Chiotis, Konstantinos , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Schwarz, Christopher G. , Smith, Ruben, Stephens, Andrew W., Carrillo, María C. , Kolb, Hartmuth C. , Brendel, Matthias , Xie, Fang , Rowe, Christopher Cleon , Hansson, Oskar , Doré, Vincent

Alzheimer's & Dementia | January 8, 2026 | Volume: 21 | Issue: S2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz70856_106362 Get It

Abstract Background The Joint Propagation Model (JPM)‐based CenTauR scale was recently introduced to harmonize tau‐PET quantification across different radiotracers. This study examined how CenTauR harmonization enhances the comparability of tau‐PET quantification across matched cohorts using different tracers. The evaluation focused on three key aspects: (1) comparing tau‐PET positivity rates as defined by CenTauR, (2) evaluating its diagnostic accuracy for symptomatic AD, and (3) analyzing longitudinal changes in tau‐PET rates over time. Method The JPM, developed by the CPAD‐led Tau PET Harmonization Working Group (Leuzy et al., Alzheimers Dement. 2024; Figure 1A), models relationships between anchor point subjects and head‐to‐head tau‐PET SUVR data onto the CenTauR scale, providing conversion equations for multiple tracers. JPM equations were applied to [ 18 F]flortaucipir SUVR (Meta‐temporal ROI) data from 561 cognitively impaired participants in the ADNI and OASIS‐3 studies. Using ROC analysis, we determined the CenTauR cut‐off for positivity (T+) that maximized the Youden index for discriminating between FDA‐approved positive/negative visual reads. Three separate cohorts, scanned using [ 18 F]flortaucipir (ADNI), [ 18 F]MK‐6240 (CPAS), and [ 18 F]RO‐948 (BioFINDER‐2), were matched 1:1 by age, MMSE, amyloid‐β, and clinical diagnosis. CenTauR‐based metrics were compared across these cohorts. Result A cut‐off of 18 CenTauRs was found to optimally classify [ 18 F]flortaucipir PET visual reads (Figure 1B). The matching procedure identified 1089 participants (363 per cohort). The frequency of T+ using the 18 CenTauRs cut‐off for the Meta‐Temporal ROI was highly comparable across tracers across groups, except for the Aβ‐positive cognitively unimpaired group, where variability was more pronounced due to a smaller sample size (Figure 2A). Similarly, tau‐PET discriminative accuracy for symptomatic AD vs controls remained similar across [ 18 F]flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240 (Figure 2B). In a separate sample of 212 matched participants from ADNI ([ 18 F]flortaucipir) and AIBL ([ 18 F]MK‐6240) with baseline and 1‐year follow‐up tau‐PET scans, 1‐year change in CenTauRs was comparable (Figure 2C). An exploratory voxelwise transformation, utilizing the Meta‐Temporal conversion equation in a representative case scanned with both [ 18 F]flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240, demonstrates the potential for voxelwise CenTauR harmonization (Figure 3). Conclusion These analyses suggest that CenTauR harmonization increases the comparability of tau‐PET data acquired with different tracers. Additional validation analyses with larger cohorts including other radiotracers ([ 18 F]PI‐2620) are underway.
Every Centiloid, from Everywhere, All at Once
Snyder, Heather M. , Apostolova, Liana G., Bombois, Stéphanie, Bourgeat, Pierrick, Braskie, Meredith N. , Carrillo, Maria, Casaletto, Kaitlin B, Chang, C. -C., Chang, Hsin‐I., Chao, Yishu , Chetelat, Gaël, Collij, Lyduine E., Dickerson, Brad C., Dubois, Bruno, Valdez, Alfonso Fajardo, Farrar, Gill , Fortea, Juan M., Frisoni, Giovanni B, Gu, Yuna , Guo, Tengfei, Hansson, Oskar H., Huang, Q., Huang, Shu‐Hua , Ishii, Kenji, Jagust, William J., Kato, Takashi , Koeppe, R. A., Kramer, Joel H, Landau, Susan M., Landeau, Brigitte, Lee, Sangwon, Lopresti, Brian J. , Lowe, Val J. , Mao, Xiaoxie, March, Andrew, Masters, Colin L., Mézenge, Florence, Mormino, Elizabeth C. , Franquesa‐Mullerat, María , Nakamura, Akinori, O'Bryant, Sid E., Pappas, Ioannis G., Rowe, C. C., Schott, Jonathan M, Schwartz, Daniel L. , Schwarz, Christopher G, Seo, Sang Won, Shekari, Mahnaz, Smith, Ruben, Sokołowski, Andrzej , Soleimani‐Meigooni, David, Sperling, Reisa A., Sun, Pan , Toga, Arthur W., Vaillancourt, David E. , Flier, Wiesje M. van der, Vemuri, Prashanthi, Villain, Nicolas , Villemagne, Victor L., Villeneuve, Sylvia , Wang, Wei‐En, Weiner, Michael S. W., Xiao, Cally , Xie, Fang, Yoon, Yeojun, Yun, M R , Rabinovici, Gil D., Wang, Wei‐en , Blazhenets, Ganna , Apostolova, Liana G. , Asken, Breton M. , Bejanin, Alexandre , Bombois, Stéphanie , Bourgeat, Pierrick , Casaletto, Kaitlin B. , Cash, David M. , Chang, Hsin‐I , Chételat, Gaël , Coath, William , Collij, Lyduine , Colmant, Lise , Dickerson, Brad C., Dubois, Bruno , Fortea, Juan , Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Gardner, Raquel C. , Garibotto, Valentina , Guo, Tengfei , Hanseeuw, Bernard , Hansson, Oskar , Harrison, Theresa M. , Ishii, Kazunari , Jagust, William J. , Kramer, Joel H. , Landau, Susan, Landeau, Brigitte , Masters, Colin L. , Mézenge, Florence, Nakamura, Akinori , O’Bryant, Sid E. , Peretti, Débora Elisa , Quenon, Lisa , Salvadó, Gemma , Schott, Jonathan M. , Schwarz, Christopher G. , Seo, Sang Won , Shekari, Mahnaz , Silbert, Lisa C. , Sokolowski, Andrzej, Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Sperling, Reisa Anne , Sun, Pan , Toga, Arthur W. , Giessen, Elsmarieke van de , Flier, Wiesje M. van der , Vemuri, Prashanthi , Villemagne, Victor L. , Weiner, Michael W. , Xie, Fang , Young, Christina B. , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Joie, Renaud La

Alzheimer's & Dementia | December 23, 2025 | Volume: 21 | Issue: S8 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz70862_110011 Get It

Abstract Background Ten years after the original publication, the Centiloid framework is now broadly used to harmonize amyloid‐PET quantification, facilitate data sharing and comparison across cohorts, and even assist visual interpretation in clinical settings. We evaluated the global implementation of Centiloids by comparing their distribution and corresponding positivity thresholds across cohorts. Methods We gathered data from publicly available cohorts and reached out to investigators across the world to collect cross‐sectional Centiloids, demographic and clinical information, and visual read data. Gaussian mixture models (GMM, k=2) were fitted to Centiloid values for each cohort and cutoffs were calculated as mean + 2SD of the lower Gaussian. When visual reads were available, we determined Centiloid cutoffs that maximized correspondence with visual reads (Cohen’s kappa). Data was combined across cohorts using random effects meta‐analyses. Results As of January 2025, we included 37 cohorts ( n = 41,678 participants) with heterogeneous pipelines, radiotracers, and clinical and demographic characteristics (Table‐1). The low Gaussian peaks ranged from ‐9 to 10CL; the meta‐analysis identified a common peak at 1CL. The second peaks were more heterogeneous (range=38‐102CL; meta‐analysis outcome=64CL). Across cohorts, the proportion of cognitively unimpaired versus impaired participants impacted the position of both peaks, with better separation in cohorts enriched in impaired individuals (Figure‐1C). The meta‐analysis indicated a GMM‐based cutoff of 19CL (95%CI: 16‐21CL, Figure‐1B); subgroup analyses showed no evidence of significant effect between single versus multicenter settings (17 versus 20CL, p = 0.30), MRI‐based or PET‐only processing (18 versus 19CL, p = 0.88), and no evidence of difference across radiotracers (Flutemetamol: 16CL; PIB: 17CL, Flutafuranol: 18CL, Florbetaben: 19CL, Florbetapir: 20CL, p = 0.78). In a subset of 29,496 participants with visual reads available, binary visual reads corresponded well to Centiloids (common kappa=0.86, Figure‐2A). The visual read‐based cutoff of 24CL (95%CI: 21‐27CL, Figure‐2B) maximized correspondence between visual read and quantification and was slightly higher than the GMM‐based cutoff. All meta‐analysis models showed high non‐random heterogeneity (I 2 >80%) across studies, suggesting non‐random differences in peaks and cutoffs. Conclusions Meta‐analysis‐based cutoffs align well with thresholds from the existing literature. High heterogeneity among studies underscores the need to investigate contributing factors, raising concerns about applying common cutoffs.
External Validation of Joint Propagation Model‐Based Tau PET CenTauR units
Leuzy, Antoine , Raket, Lars Lau, Villemagne, Victor L., Klein, Gregory , Tonietto, Matteo, Olafson, Emily, Baker, Suzanne L. , Saad, Ziad S., Bullich, Santiago , Lopresti, Brian J. , Sanabria, Sandra , Boada, Mercè, Charil, A., Collins, Emily C., Collins, Jessica, Gunn, Roger N. , Higuchi, Makoto, Hostetler, Eric D., Hutchison, R. Matthew, Iaccarino, Leonardo, Insel, Philip S., Irizarry, Michael C., Jack, C. R., Jagust, William J., Johnson, Keith A., Johnson, Sterling C., Karten, Yashmin, Marquié, Marta, Mathotaarachchi, Sulantha , Mintun, Mark A., Huang, Q., Mao, Xiaxie, Gnörich, Johannes , Pappas, Ioannis, Petersen, Ronald, Schwarz, Christopher G, Smith, Ruben, Stephens, Andrew , Whittington, Alex , Carrillo, Maria, Pontecorvo, Michael J. , Haeberlein, Samantha Budd , Dunn, Billy , Kolb, H., Stephenson, Diane , Tatton, Nadine , Brendel, M., Xie, Fang, Hansson, Oskar H., Rial, Alexis Moscoso , Rakêt, Lars Lau , Villemagne, Victor L. , Tonietto, Mattéo , Olafson, Emily, Lutz, Olivia , Boada, Merce , Betthauser, Tobey J. , Collins, Emily C. , Higuchi, Makoto, Hutchison, R. Matthew , Iaccarino, Leonardo , Insel, Philip S. , Irizarry, Michael C. , Jack, Clifford R. , Jagust, William J. , Johnson, Keith A. , Johnson, Sterling C. , Marquié, Marta , Ossenkoppele, Rik , Pappas, Ioannis , Petersen, Ronald, Chiotis, Konstantinos , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Schwarz, Christopher G. , Kolb, Hartmuth C. , Brendel, Matthias , Rowe, Christopher Cleon , Hansson, Oskar , Doré, Vincent

Alzheimer's & Dementia | December 23, 2025 | Volume: 21 | Issue: S8 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz70862_109722 Get It

Abstract Background The Joint Propagation Model (JPM)‐based CenTauR scale was recently introduced to harmonize tau‐PET quantification across different radiotracers. This study examined how CenTauR harmonization enhances the comparability of tau‐PET quantification across matched cohorts using different tracers. The evaluation focused on three key aspects: (1) comparing tau‐PET positivity rates as defined by CenTauR, (2) evaluating its diagnostic accuracy for symptomatic AD, and (3) analyzing longitudinal changes in tau‐PET rates over time. Method The JPM, developed by the CPAD‐led Tau PET Harmonization Working Group (Leuzy et al., Alzheimers Dement. 2024; Figure 1A), models relationships between anchor point subjects and head‐to‐head tau‐PET SUVR data onto the CenTauR scale, providing conversion equations for multiple tracers. JPM equations were applied to [¹⁸F]flortaucipir SUVR (Meta‐temporal ROI) data from 561 cognitively impaired participants in the ADNI and OASIS‐3 studies. Using ROC analysis, we determined the CenTauR cut‐off for positivity (T+) that maximized the Youden index for discriminating between FDA‐approved positive/negative visual reads. Three separate cohorts, scanned using [¹⁸F]flortaucipir (ADNI), [¹⁸F]MK‐6240 (CPAS), and [¹⁸F]RO‐948 (BioFINDER‐2), were matched 1:1 by age, MMSE, amyloid‐β, and clinical diagnosis. CenTauR‐based metrics were compared across these cohorts. Result A cut‐off of 18 CenTauRs was found to optimally classify [ 18 F]flortaucipir PET visual reads (Figure 1B). The matching procedure identified 1089 participants (363 per cohort). The frequency of T+ using the 18 CenTauRs cut‐off for the Meta‐Temporal ROI was highly comparable across tracers across groups, except for the Aβ‐positive cognitively unimpaired group, where variability was more pronounced due to a smaller sample size (Figure 2A). Similarly, tau‐PET discriminative accuracy for symptomatic AD vs controls remained similar across [ 18 F]flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240 (Figure 2B). In a separate sample of 212 matched participants from ADNI ([¹⁸F]flortaucipir) and AIBL ([¹⁸F]MK‐6240) with baseline and 1‐year follow‐up tau‐PET scans, 1‐year change in CenTauRs was comparable (Figure 2C). An exploratory voxelwise transformation, utilizing the Meta‐Temporal conversion equation in a representative case scanned with both [¹⁸F]flortaucipir and [¹⁸F]MK‐6240, demonstrates the potential for voxelwise CenTauR harmonization (Figure 3). Conclusion These analyses suggest that CenTauR harmonization increases the comparability of tau‐PET data acquired with different tracers. Additional validation analyses with larger cohorts including other radiotracers ([¹⁸F]PI‐2620) are underway.
The Role of CENPK Splice Variant in Abiraterone Response in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Huang, Minhong , Gao, Huanyao , Kim, Wootae , John, August , Weinshilboum, Richard M. , Wang, Liewei , Xie, Fang , Gao, Huanyao , Kim, Wootae , John, August , Qin, Sisi , Xie, Fang , Yin, Ping , Weinshilboum, Richard M.

Cells | September 30, 2024 | Volume: 13 | Issue: 19 | Pages: 1622

10.3390/cells13191622 | PMID 39404386 Get It

Most patients with metastatic prostate cancer eventually develop resistance to primary androgen deprivation therapy. To identify predictive biomarker for Abiraterone acetate/prednisone resistance, we screened alternative splice variants between responders and non-responders from the PROMOTE clinical study and pinned down the most significant variant, CENPK–delta8. Through preclinical patient-derived mouse xenograft (PDX) and 3D organoids obtained from responders and non-responders, as well as in vitro models, aberrant CENPK–delta8 expression was determined to link to drug resistance via enhanced migration and proliferation. The FLNA and FLOT1 were observed to specifically bind to CENK–delta8 rather than wild-type CENPK, underscoring the role of CENPK–delta8 in cytoskeleton organization and cell migration. Our study, leveraging data from the PROMOTE study, TCGA, and TCGA SpliceReq databases, highlights the important function of alternative splice variants in drug response and their potential to be prognostic biomarkers for improving individual therapeutic outcomes in precision medicine.
Biomarkers for Predicting Abiraterone Treatment Outcome and Selecting Alternative Therapies in Castration‐Resistant Prostate Cancer
Gao, Huanyao , Kim, Wootae , Scholz, Jodi A. , Yu, Jia , Qin, Bo , Zhuang, Yongxian , Tan, Winston , Bryce, Alan H. , Weinshilboum, Richard M. , Wang, Liewei , Xie, Fang , Bryce, Alan H , Kim, Wootae , Qin, Sisi , Zhang, Huan , Gu, Yayun , Kalari, Krishna R. , Sinnwell, Jason P. , Xie, Fang , Yin, Ping , Wei, Lixuan , Weinshilboum, Richard M.

Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics | March 15, 2022 | Volume: 111 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1296-1306

10.1002/cpt.2582 | PMID 35288936 Get It

Approximately one‐third of patients with metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) exhibited primary abiraterone resistance. To identify alternative treatment for abiraterone nonresponders, we performed drug discovery analyses using the L1000 database using differentially expressed genes identified in tumor biopsies and patient‐derived xenograft (PDX) tumors between abiraterone responders and nonresponders enrolled in PROMOTE trial. This approach identified 3 drugs, including topoisomerase II (TOP2) inhibitor mitoxantrone, CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib, and pan‐CDK inhibitor PHA‐793887. These drugs significantly suppressed the growth of abiraterone‐resistant cell lines and PDX models. Moreover, we identified 11 genes targeted by all 3 drugs that were associated with worse outcomes in both the PROMOTE and Stand Up To Cancer cohorts. This 11‐gene panel might also function as biomarkers to select the 3 alternative therapies for this subgroup of patients with CRPC, warranting further clinical investigation.
Abstract A05: Developing patient derived xenograft (PDX) models for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) during CYP17 inhibitor therapy
Xie, Fang , Kohli, Manish , Ping, Yin, Jiménez, Rafael E. , Weinshilboum, Richard M. , Wang, Liewei , Weinshilboum, Richard M. , Kohli, Manish

Clinical Cancer Research | March 1, 2017 | Volume: 22 | Issue: 16_Supplement | Pages: A05-A05

10.1158/1557-3265.pdx16-a05 Get It

Abstract Castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is a deadly disease with a poor prognosis. Treatment options for CRPC patients involve taxanes or newly developed drugs targeting the androgen pathway or androgen synthesis, including CYP17 inhibitors. However, response to therapy varies dramatically among patients, which might be due, in part, to tumor heterogeneity. Therefore, understanding of the genomic landscape of CRPC would be important to help achieve better outcomes by developing personalized therapies. One challenge contributing to our lack of therapies for CRPC is a paucity of clinically relevant animal models predictive of response to therapy in human patients. The Prostate Cancer Medically Optimized Genome Enhanced Therapy (PROMOTE) study is a Mayo Clinic prospective trial designed for patients with metastatic CRPC who are treated with abiraterone acetate, a CYP17 inhibitor, over a 12 week period. Fresh tissue from metastatic lesions, primarily bone metastases, was obtained by needle core biopsy before and 12 weeks after initiating abiraterone acetate treatment. The samples were submitted for DNA and RNA sequencing and were also used to generate patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models. PDX models were developed by injecting biopsy samples subcutaneously or under the renal capsule in male non-obese diabetic (NOD)/severe combined immunodeficient (SCID) or NOD/SCID/IL-2γ-receptor null (NSG) mice implanted with 25mg testosterone pellets at the time of tissue implantation and 2 months later. Baseline samples from 103 unique patients as well as second samples from 61 patients post abiraterone acetate treatment were injected into approximately 600 mice. Of the samples for which pathology is currently available, 31% of the biopsies injected into mice were confirmed to include tumor tissue, which may be compared with a figure of 37.5% of samples sent for sequencing. Thus far, we have established 8 PDX models, four from baseline and four from post treatment samples. Seven models were derived from metastatic bone lesions, and one model from a liver metastasis. The tumor tissue in each model was expanded into a second of generation of mice and harvested when the tumors grew. No tumor was expanded more than four times. Genomic and transcriptomic analysis of xenograft tissue from different “generations” of xenograft expansion is ongoing and will be compared with similar data for the original biopsy. The evaluation of treatment response after exposure of these PDX models to different therapies including CYP19 inhibitors, AR blockers and taxanes is ongoing. These PDX models provide a tool for future drug testing and for studying mechanisms of resistance to therapy in CRPC. Citation Format: Fang Xie, Manish Kohli, Yin Ping, Rafael E. Jimenez, Richard M. Weinshilboum, Liewei Wang. Developing patient derived xenograft (PDX) models for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) during CYP17 inhibitor therapy. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference: Patient-Derived Cancer Models: Present and Future Applications from Basic Science to the Clinic; Feb 11-14, 2016; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2016;22(16_Suppl):Abstract nr A05.
Genetic Polymorphisms in the Long Noncoding RNA MIR2052HG Offer a Pharmacogenomic Basis for the Response of Breast Cancer Patients to Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy
Goss, Paul E. , Shepherd, Lois E. , Chapman, J. W. , Chen, Bingshu E. , Kubo, Michiaki , Furukawa, Yoichi , Momozawa, Yukihide , Stearns, Vered , Barman, Poulami , Weinshilboum, Richard M. , Kalari, Krishna R. , Wang, Liewei , Xie, Fang , Ingle, James N. , Xie, Fang , Ellis, Matthew J. , Chapman, Judith‐Anne W. , Pritchard, Kathleen I. , Carlson, Erin E. , Goetz, Matthew P. , Weinshilboum, Richard M. , Stearns, Vered , Chen, Bingshu E , Kalari, Krishna R

Cancer Research | October 11, 2016 | Volume: 76 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 7012-7023

10.1158/0008-5472.can-16-1371 | PMID 27758888 Get It

Abstract Genetic risks in breast cancer remain only partly understood. Here, we report the results of a genome-wide association study of germline DNA from 4,658 women, including 252 women experiencing a breast cancer recurrence, who were entered on the MA.27 adjuvant trial comparing the aromatase inhibitors (AI) anastrozole and exemestane. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) of top significance were identified in the gene encoding MIR2052HG, a long noncoding RNA of unknown function. Heterozygous or homozygous individuals for variant alleles exhibited a ∼40% or ∼63% decrease, respectively, in the hazard of breast cancer recurrence relative to homozygous wild-type individuals. Functional genomic studies in lymphoblastoid cell lines and ERα-positive breast cancer cell lines showed that expression from MIR2052HG and the ESR1 gene encoding estrogen receptor-α (ERα) was induced by estrogen and AI in a SNP-dependent manner. Variant SNP genotypes exhibited increased ERα binding to estrogen response elements, relative to wild-type genotypes, a pattern that was reversed by AI treatment. Further, variant SNPs were associated with lower expression of MIR2052HG and ERα. RNAi-mediated silencing of MIR2052HG in breast cancer cell lines decreased ERα expression, cell proliferation, and anchorage-independent colony formation. Mechanistic investigations revealed that MIR2052HG sustained ERα levels both by promoting AKT/FOXO3-mediated ESR1 transcription and by limiting ubiquitin-mediated, proteasome-dependent degradation of ERα. Taken together, our results define MIR2052HS as a functionally polymorphic gene that affects risks of breast cancer recurrence in women treated with AI. More broadly, our results offer a pharmacogenomic basis to understand differences in the response of breast cancer patients to AI therapy. Cancer Res; 76(23); 7012–23. ©2016 AACR.