Citations

AbstractBackgroundStandardizing tau pathology quantification in vivo is challenged by differences in binding characteristics between tau‐PET tracers. The HEAD study aims to generate a leading, longitudinal head‐to‐head dataset of MK‐6240, Flortaucipir, RO948, and PI‐2620 tau‐PET to harmonize these tracers' outcomes and develop tools allowing for the generalization of findings across large studies and trials. Here, we present current advancements in building the HEAD study cohort and dataset.MethodsThe HEAD study is managed at the University of Pittsburgh. HEAD comprises several sites across the US and Canada in which 620 subjects (young, cognitively unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease (AD)) will undergo tau‐PET with at least two tracers, amyloid‐PET with PiB or NAV4694, MRI, blood collection, and standardized neuropsychological testing at baseline and at 18‐month follow‐up. PET and MRI acquisition parameters are based on ADNI4 protocols and neuropsychological testing employs the NACC Uniform Data Set. The National Centralized Repository for AD serves as the biorepository for blood samples and the Laboratory of Neuroimaging provides a centralized database for imaging and neuropsychological archiving. PET data is reconstructed to maximize cross‐scanner harmonization and is processed uniformly similarly to ADNI4 PET.ResultsIn one year of active enrollment (Jan 2023‐Jan 2024), 362 participants were enrolled at six active sites; over 80% of participants completed neuropsychological testing and MRI, and over 70% completed Flortaucipir, MK‐6240, and amyloid‐PET, with a mean tau‐PET acquisition window of 29.1 days. RO948 and PI‐2620 tau‐PET are additionally acquired in a subset currently including 41 participants (Figure 1). Current HEAD cohort demographics including age, sex, underrepresented populations, and group distributions, APOEε4 carrier status, and amyloid positivity are shown in Figure 2. A case of a subject with AD with all 4 tau‐PET tracers acquired head‐to‐head within 49 days is shown in Figure 3.ConclusionThe HEAD study represents a continued effort in the optimization of AD imaging biomarkers. Baseline data collection is projected to be completed in 2024; results being generated by multiple groups from this dataset will provide novel and crucial guidance on the use of tau‐PET tracers in research, clinical trials, and prospectively in clinical practice.

AbstractBackgroundDifferences between on‐ and off‐target retention characteristics between [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir (FTP) complicate the harmonization across tracers. Our objective here was to separate the impact of the reference region by evaluating correlations between [18F]MK6240 (MK) and [18F]FTP standard uptake values (SUVs).MethodParticipants (Figure 1, n=90) received an amyloid‐β (Aβ) PET scan ([11C]PIB or [18F]NAV4694) and two tau‐PET scans: [18F]MK (90‐110 minutes post‐injection) and [18F]FTP (80‐100 minutes post‐injection). For all PET scans, the individual frames were realigned, averaged, and co‐registered to a Freesurfer 7.1‐segmented T1‐MPRAGE. SUVs were calculated in the reference region (inferior cerebellar gray), on‐target regions (entorhinal cortex, hippocampus, Braak III, Braak IV, Braak V, Braak VI) and off‐target regions (caudate, pallidum, putamen, thalamus, cerebellar white matter, choroid plexus, meninges, eroded white matter). We examined correlations between [18F]MK and [18F]FTP SUV values as a function of Aβ status, as well as their associations with age.ResultAll correlations (Figure 2) were significant at p<0.001. The interaction with Aβ status was significant for hippocampus, BraakIII‐V and the metatemporal region. In Aβ+ participants, [18F]FTP and [18F]MK6240 have similar SUVs in on‐target regions with a slope close to 1 except for in hippocampus and Braak VI. However, [18F]FTP SUVs, on average, were greater than [18F]MK SUVs in Aβ+ and Aβ‐ subjects in the reference region and all off‐target regions except for meninges, and in Aβ‐ subjects in the on‐target regions. Age correlated with [18F]FTP SUVs in Aβ‐ subjects in all regions (except the reference region, Braak VI and meninges) and [18F]MK SUVs in putamen and pallidum, but this correlation was only significant (p<0.01) when young and old subjects were included.ConclusionDespite [18F]MK’s higher affinity for tau and SUVR dynamic range being twice that of [18F]FTP, the SUVs in on‐target regions are similar. The higher [18F]FTP signal in the reference region appears to be the contributing factor to the lower dynamic range. The higher [18F]FTP signal in on‐target regions for Aβ‐ subjects may reflect the presence of off‐target signals in these subjects. Taking off‐target signals into account should improve correlations between the two tracers, especially when measuring the earliest deposition of tau.

AbstractBackgroundThe association between [18F]Flortaucipir (FTP) and [18F]MK6240, two commonly used tau‐PET tracers in Alzheimer’s disease (AD), varies due to distinct binding properties and off‐target signal regions. Our study aims to elucidate the biological factors influencing this association and evaluate the applicability of a common equation across different on‐target regions.Method113 individuals from the HEAD dataset (11 young, 58 cognitively unimpaired elderly, and 44 cognitively impaired) underwent [18F]MK6240, [18F]FTP and Aβ‐PET scans. Images were processed using the inferior cerebellar grey (CG) as the reference region, with subjects categorized by Aβ status. Stepwise linear fitting identified off‐target (OFF) regions impacting tracer associations within the whole cortex, Braak and temporal‐meta regions of interest (ROIs). OFF regions included were a composite mask (pallidum, putamen, caudate ‐ PPC) to address collinearity in subcortical nuclei, as well as the region with the greatest partial volume effects (PVE) on the ROI (meninges, choroid plexus, and the hotspot medial to entorhinal cortices (EC)). Akaike information criteria (AIC) analyses tested linear models with various off‐target regions.ResultPPC and PVE regions influenced tracer association in on‐target regions. PPC binding is associated with age. PPC and meninges retention, along with Aβ status interaction, demonstrated the best model fit for the whole cortex (Figure 1). Weighting factors derived from the whole cortex model were applied to Braak regions and temporal meta‐ROI. Braak III‐VI and temporal‐meta ROI showed optimal models including OFF regions and Aβ status interaction (Figure 2). Forcing the whole equation gave optimal results. For Braak I (EC), adding the OFF covariates only was the best model. For Braak II (hippocampus), the best model included OFF regions and the interaction with Aβ status (Figure 2). Forcing the whole cortex equation onto Braak I and Braak II yielded suboptimal fits.ConclusionHarmonizing tau‐PET tracers involves considering significant covariates. Integrating meningeal and age‐related off‐target regions enhances [18F]MK6240 and [18F]FTP association in on‐target regions, further improved by Aβ status inclusion. While the whole cortex model may not suit early ROI, it proves effective for Braak III and beyond. Creating an equation for tracer translation necessitates incorporating meningeal and subnuclei off‐target retention.

AbstractBackgroundTau‐PET tracers allow for in vivo Braak staging of individuals in the Alzheimer’s disease (AD) continuum. The impact of tracers’ characteristics for Braak staging using tau‐PET remains unclear. Therefore, we performed a head‐to‐head comparison of Braak staging using first‐ and second‐generation tau‐PET tracers.MethodWe assessed 51 cognitively unimpaired (CU) and 49 cognitively impaired participants (mean [SD] age 69.4 [7.5] years) with at least two tau‐PET ligands ([18F]MK6240, [18F]AV1451, and/or [18F]RO948) at McGill University, as part of the HEAD study. We calculated standardized uptake value ratios (SUVR) in Braak‐like regions of interest (ROI) for each ligand and investigated their association using Spearman’s correlation. Thresholds defined the presence of tauopathy in each Braak ROI, which was used to assign a Braak stage to each participant. Finally, we assessed the agreement between the Braak staging provided by each tracer, both for the traditional (using separate Braak stages – 0, I, II, III, IV, V, and VI) and simplified (using joint Braak stages – 0, I‐II, III‐IV, and V‐VI) frameworks.ResultIn all Braak ROIs, we found positive correlations between the SUVR values of the three tracers (Figure 1). The strongest correlation was between [18F]MK6240 and [18F]RO948 in Braak II (r=0.94), and the weakest between [18F]AV1451 and [18F]RO948 in VI (r=0.51). Inter‐tracer agreement regarding the latest stage of abnormality was substantial or nearly perfect between pairs of tracers but moderate between the three tracers (Figure 2A). The simplified framework presented greater agreement compared to traditional Braak staging, except between [18F]MK6240 and [18F]RO948. At the ROI level, the lowest agreements were observed for Braak II and I‐II, when [18F]MK6240 and [18F]RO948 were compared to [18F]AV1451 (Figure 2B‐C). [18F]AV1451 had the highest probability of overestimating the Braak stage assigned by [18F]MK6240 and by [18F]RO948, especially at earlier stages (Figure 3).ConclusionThe ligands presented moderate to nearly perfect agreement for in vivo staging of AD severity. Off‐target binding of [18F]AV1451 to the choroid plexus might explain disagreements at early stages. Overall, slight improvements in agreements were achieved with the simplified framework, as observed in histopathological staging.

AbstractBackgroundNormative models (NM) of brain metrics based on large, diverse populations offer novel strategies to detect individual brain abnormalities. To create an age‐dependent statistical model of brain microstructure over the human lifespan, we built the largest multi‐site NM of white matter (WM) diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) metrics based on 54,591 subjects. We used state‐of‐the‐art tools to adjust for site‐dependent effects.MethodWe used Hierarchical Bayesian Regression (HBR) to determine the age trajectory and lifespan centile curves (ages 3‐100 years) by merging data from different sections of the lifespan. We analyzed 19 international public datasets with the ENIGMA‐DTI protocol. Mean fractional anisotropy (FA), mean, axial, and radial diffusivity (MD, AxD, RD) were extracted for 21 bilateral ROIs from the JHU‐WM atlas and the whole WM skeleton. Regressions were run with each metric per ROI as a function of age and sex, and the DTI protocol as the batch effect (37 protocols). Z‐scores were derived for 81 patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD; mean age: 77y±8.4, 46M/35F) and 225 MCI participants (mean age: 75.1y±8.1, 127M/98F) and extreme deviations (Z>|2|) were quantified for each condition. ROI‐wise areas under the ROC curve were calculated to determine the classification accuracy of the Z‐scores.ResultThe average FA for the overall WM skeleton reached its peak value at 27 years, with minima for MD, RD and AxD at 47, 42 and 54 years, respectively. We found extreme FA deviations (Z>2) for MCI (AUC=0.67) and AD (AUC=0.66) in the genu of the corpus callosum, extreme RD deviations (Z<2) in the tapetum (AUC=0.73) and Extreme AxD deviations (Z>2) for MCI in the superior longitudinal fasciculus (AUC=0.65). See Figures 1 & 2.ConclusionNM of brain microstructure with HBR yielded lifespan trajectories for widely‐used DTI metrics. By pooling large scale multi‐site dMRI to create a statistical reference, single subject deviations are detectable across the lifespan for AD and MCI. These NM will be publicly available to the research community.

AbstractBackgroundThe HEAD study focuses on collecting an extensive dataset from various tau‐PET tracers, aiming to establish robust anchor values, which are essential for harmonizing tau‐PET measurements. Here, we aim to showcase the capability of converting 3D tau‐PET images into a common scale using the Universal Tau‐PET Scale, Uniτ (tau), and to use these 3D images to subsequently obtain ROIs as needed.MethodsWe assessed 185 individuals across the aging and AD spectrum from the HEAD study, with [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK‐6240 tau‐PET tracers. Tau‐PET SUVR images were standardized to a common 8mm FWHM, using the inferior cerebellar gray matter as the reference region. We generated Uniτ Tau‐PET 3D images using a single formula based on Meta‐temporal parameters in two steps: first, within‐tracer anchoring based on young (<25 years) and cognitively impaired individuals; second, between‐tracer anchoring using a piecewise transformation from [18F]Flortaucipir to [18F]MK‐6240, with smoothing at the piecewise inflection point. Subsequently, we extracted mean Uniτ values from these 3D images for key ROIs, including meta‐temporal, mesial, temporo‐parietal, frontal, and Braak stages III‐VI. Finally, we correlated Uniτ values across ROIs between the two tracers to evaluate the accuracy of estimates from the voxel‐wise transformation.ResultsThe original SUVR images present large differences between the two tau‐PET tracers (Figure 1). However, upon applying the Uniτ piecewise transformation with smoothing to all brain voxels, we were able to reasonably harmonize these images to the Uniτ scale, substantially reducing visual variability. Notably, the mean Uniτ values for the ROIs extracted from these harmonized 3D tau‐PET brain images demonstrated a high level of association between the two tracers (Figure 2). Furthermore, estimates generated from ROIs or extracted from our 3D parametric Uniτ model yielded identical estimates (Figure 3).ConclusionThe strong associations between tracers after directly harmonizing 3D images to Uniτ scale using the piecewise transformation with smoothing, underscore the effectiveness of the proposed method. This approach provides a reliable and standardized way to compare tau‐PET data across different tracers. Our results indicate the feasibility of harmonizing 3D tau‐PET images without relying on pre‐established ROIs, overcoming the limitation of restricting the analysis to only few brain regions.

AbstractBackgroundTau PET provides continuous measurements of tau tangle pathology in the human brain. However, establishing cutoffs is crucial for selecting individuals for treatment in clinical trials or practice. In the absence of postmortem data, PET cutoffs must be established using statistical methods based on what is considered normal tracer uptake. In this study, we tested the impact of various methods to determine tau positivity using two different tau PET tracers in individuals scanned head‐to‐head.MethodsWe studied 147 individuals from Head‐to‐Head Harmonization of Tau Tracers in Alzheimer's Disease (HEAD) study with tau tangle PET scans with [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK‐6240, and amyloid‐β (Aβ) PET. Tau deposition was measured with the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) of each agent in the Medial Temporal Lobe (MTL) and the Entorhinal Cortex (EC). To determine Tau positivity three different methods were used: >2.5 standard deviations (SD) than the mean of the young, >1.5 SD mean of the cognitively unimpaired (CU) and >1.5 SD mean of CUAβ‐.ResultsDemographic characteristics of the study population are reported in Table 1. Using the cutoff >2.5 SD mean of young, [18F]Flortaucipir was positive in 35 (23.8%) and 69 (46.9%) individuals in the EC and MTL, respectively. [18F]MK‐6240 was positive in 49 (33.3%) and 58 (39.5%) individuals in EC and in MTL. Using >1.5 SD mean of CUAβ‐, [18F]Flortaucipir was positive in 38 (25.9%) and 45 (30.6%) individuals in EC and MTL, while [18F]MK‐6240 was positive in 51 (34.7%) and 50 (34.0%) in EC and in MTL (Figure 1).ConclusionsOur findings indicate variations in tau positivity when employing different methods based on either the young or CUAβ‐. [18F]Flortaucipir exhibited a higher rate of positive results when the method based on young individuals was applied in the MTL. Conversely, [18F]MK‐6240 showed more consistent and generally higher positivity when other methods were used for cutoff determination and/or in the EC region. Further research with a larger sample size is required to gain a better understanding of the optimal cutoff determination methods for these tracers.

AbstractBackgroundUtilizing PET amyloid‐beta (Aβ) and tau for staging Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) has demonstrated potential in identifying individuals with varying degrees of disease severity, applicable to both clinical trials and practice. However, the diverse binding characteristics of tau tracers pose challenges to the application of this staging across different ligands. In this study, we evaluate a novel staging framework proposed by the AA working group, employing Aβ PET and either [18F]MK6240 or [18F]Flortaucipir in individuals participating in a head‐to‐head study of tau PET tracers. This will provide insights into the robustness of this framework when applied across different tau ligands.MethodWe evaluated 154 people (89 CU and 65 CI), with MK6240, Flortaucipir, Aβ‐PET, MRI. SUVRs used inferior cerebellar gray as reference. Participants were categorized in Aβ positivity(A), using visual read, and tau positivity (T) in medial temporal lobe(MTL) and neocortex(NEO). Tau MTL(TMTL) and NEO positivity were defined as average +3 SD of youngs. NEO moderate(TMOD) and high(THIGH) was defined as below and above median SUVR of NEO‐positive individuals. Individuals were grouped as: A‐T‐, A+T‐, A+TMTL+(early), A+TMOD+(intermediary), and A+THIGH+(advanced).ResultsWe found that the distribution of the number of individuals across the five AD stages was comparable when using both MK6240 and Flortaucipir tracers (Figure 1). However, upon examining the concordance within each group, we found a low concordance of 30% (3/10) between tracers in the early tau stage (A+TMTL+). Concordance increased in the intermediary stage A+TMOD+, with a rate of 65% (9/14), and further increased to 79% (11/14) in the advanced stage (A+THIGH+). The A+T‐ group exhibited the highest concordance between tracer results, at 95% (21/22).ConclusionOur findings indicate that the application of this framework across different populations using different tau tracers can lead to a compatible distribution among groups. However, in a direct comparison, we noted that this did not necessarily result in high concordance between groups, as group shifts were observed that depended on the cutoffs used (data not shown). These results emphasize the necessity for harmonization of tau PET tracers prior to their utilization for stage determination.

AbstractBackgroundIdentifying individuals’ levels of tau PET pathology could prove to be beneficial in clinical settings, given that emerging therapies aimed reducing Aβ seem to be most effective in these individuals. Here, we present the cases of four patients who visited the memory clinic at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between June and December 2023 and underwent both Aβ and tau‐PET scans.MethodThese individuals had standard clinical and cognitive outcomes, typical blood tests order in patients with memory impairment, MRI, and, as part of the HEAD study, PET PIB Aβ and two tau PET tracers (MK6240 and Flortaucipir).ResultAll patients presented a primary complaint of progressive memory decline. The results of their blood count, metabolic panel, TSH, and vitamin B12 tests were unremarkable. Patient 1 had a normal MRI, while Patients 2‐4 exhibited mild ischemic changes (Table 1). All patients tested positive for amyloid PET, supporting the diagnosis of AD. However, their tau PET results varied. Patients 1 (MOCA = 6) and 3 (MOCA =19), who were demented with impaired Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL), tested positive for tau PET with Braak stages V‐VI using both tau PET tracers. Conversely, the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) Patients 2 (MOCA = 19) and 5 (MOCA = 29, neuropsych evaluation indicating MCI), who exhibited low tau levels, tested positive for MK6240 but negative for FTP.ConclusionAll four patients exhibited symptoms and signs consistent with typical amnestic AD presentation, which were confirmed using Aβ PET. Aβ PET presented a similar pattern across all individuals (Figure 1). Tau PET demonstrated greater variability, with lower levels in less cognitively impaired patients. Although tau PET can potentially be useful in identifying individuals in the earliest stages that would benefit from Aβ‐lowering therapies, this small series did not exclude that a low MOCA score combined with Aβ PET could achieve a similar outcome. Larger samples in real‐world clinical contexts are necessary to identify individuals with discrepancies between tau PET uptake and cognitive tests. This would reinforce the need for tau PET markers as complementary tests, singularly capable of identifying individuals across various biological stages to indicate therapies in clinical practice.

AbstractBackgroundTau PET tracers are employed to measure the accumulation of tau in vivo in the brain. Each tau tracer possesses unique characteristics, including binding affinity, sensitivity, and specificity to tau aggregates. This study leverages the HEAD study dataset, which is currently performing baseline tau PET tracers and conducting multiple clinical and cognitive assessments. The objective of this study is to elucidate the relationship between tau PET tracers [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK6240 and commonly used tests of general cognitive performance.MethodsWe assessed 170 individuals (107 cognitively unimpaired, and 63 cognitively impaired) with available PET [18F]Flortaucipir [18F]MK6240 and cognitive assessments (MoCA, MMSE, and CDR‐SB). We calculated tau PET SUVR for [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK6240 using the inferior cerebellar grey matter as a reference. Pearson correlations were performed between SUVR values for each Braak region and MoCA, MMSE, and CDR‐SB. In addition, linear regression models accounting for age, sex, years of education, HEAD site, and diagnosis were used to estimate the relationships. The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) was utilized to evaluate the models, with smaller AIC values signifying better performance.ResultsPerson correlation coefficients (r), which were calculated without considering any covariates, demonstrated higher numerical values between [18F]MK6240 and the scores of MoCA, MMSE, and CDR‐SB across the Braak regions (Figure 1). Similarly, when we performed linear regressions that accounted for relevant covariates, we found that the [18F]MK6240 SUVR in Braak 1 and Braak 4 regions exhibited a stronger association with cognitive tests than in other Braak regions or any region with [18F]Flortaucipir SUVR (Figure 2).ConclusionsBoth [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK6240 SUVR demonstrated a robust association with tests of general cognitive performance commonly used in AD research and clinical practice. Generally, Braak regions 1 and 4 exhibited a stronger association with general cognitive performance using all tests, whereas Braak regions 5‐6 showed the weakest association.