Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

60 citation(s) found for "Frisoni, Giovanni".

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.
Alzheimer's Association Workgroup: Alignment Across Criteria
Jack, Clifford R., Frisoni, Giovanni B., Jack, Clifford R. , Frisoni, Giovanni B.

Alzheimer's & Dementia | January 10, 2026 | Volume: 21 | Issue: S2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz70856_107828 Get It

Abstract Background The IWG and AA diagnostic criteria are major references in the Alzheimer's domain. Although they share analogies, some key differences should be recognized. Method The original IWG 2024 JAMA Neurology and AA 2024 Alzheimers Dement papers will be used as the major data references. Result I will outline the similarities and differences between the IWG and the AA criteria for Alzheimer's disease from the point of view of the former. I will discuss similarities regarding: Aim of clinical research on AD and other cognitive disorders, Role of co‐pathology, Role of brain reserve, Biomarker use, Indication for anti‐β‐amyloid, Contra‐indication for anti‐β‐amyloid, and Health care delivery model. I will discuss differences regarding: Core question, Scientific discourse, Knowledge source, Definition of AD, Diagnosis of AD, and Interventions for AD. Conclusion The differences between the two sets of criteria are not “just semantics”. A unified definition of AD is essential to advance the field and improve patient care.
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.
Creating a multi‐centre Amyloid PET dataset for DLB patients: Design and Methodology
Bollack, Ariane, Shekari, Mahnaz , Frisoni, Giovanni B, Hanseeuw, Bernard J, Lowe, Val J. , Collij, Lyduine E., Buckley, Christopher, Thomas, A. Goldzier, O'Brien, John T, Farrar, Gill , Bollack, Ariane , Orso, Beatrice , Shekari, Mahnaz , Boccalini, Cecilia , Garibotto, Valentina , Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Quenon, Lisa , Hanseeuw, Bernard , Collij, Lyduine , Buckley, Christopher

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

10.1002/alz70856_106683 Get It

Abstract Background Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) is often misdiagnosed or conflated with Alzheimer's Disease (AD) due to overlapping clinical presentations and neuropathological features. The presence of AD‐like features correlates with accelerated cognitive decline and a worse overall prognosis. Compared to AD, studies suggest that amyloid uptake in DLB may spare the occipital lobe. This project aims to investigate whether amyloid PET could be leveraged to differentiate between AD and DLB patients, with the goal of improving diagnostic accuracy and supporting patient stratification and safety in anti‐amyloid trials. Method This study involves collaboration across six centres (University of Geneva, BioFINDER, AMPLE, AMYPAD PNHS, MCSA, GEHC), each contributing amyloid PET imaging data from patients diagnosed with DLB based on clinical or neuropathological assessments. Moreover, each center provided an additional subset of AD and healthy controls, then matched to DLB samples based on age/sex/APOE genotype/education for comparison. A sub analysis will be performed on patients with evidence of both DLB and AD markers. Given the relatively small sample size, key aspect of the methodological approach is to reduce technical sources of variability. The processing workflow includes rigorous quality control, formatting, normalisation to MNI space, harmonisation (differential smoothing), and MRI‐based segmentation. Result The dataset currently includes amyloid PET scans (acquired using [ 11 C]PiB, [ 18 F]Flutemetamol or [ 18 F]Florbetapir) and MRI scans from ∼130 DLB patients, along with ∼150 AD patients and ∼150 controls. In addition, 99 patients positive for the CSF α‐Synuclein Seeding Amplification Assay were included. Patient data were anonymized, and a harmonised database was created, including demographic characteristics, clinical history, and results from neuropsychological assessments. Conclusion The creation of a standardized, multi‐centre amyloid PET dataset for DLB will enable the study of amyloid PET patterns at the global, regional and voxel level, in comparison with uptake in AD patients and controls. This dataset will serve as a valuable resource for investigating the neuropathological underpinnings of DLB, improving diagnostic accuracy, and potentially guiding patient stratification in anti‐amyloid trials. Efforts to integrate [ 18 F]Florbetaben and additional data are ongoing.
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.
Creating a multi‐centre Amyloid PET dataset for DLB patients: Design and Methodology
Bollack, Ariane , Shekari, Mahnaz, Frisoni, Giovanni B., Lowe, Val J. , Collij, Lyduine E., Buckley, Christopher , Thomas, Alan J, O'Brien, John T, Farrar, Gill , O’Brien, John T. , O'Brien, John Tiernan , Orso, Beatrice , Shekari, Mahnaz , Boccalini, Cecilia , Garibotto, Valentina , Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Quenon, Lisa , Hanseeuw, Bernard , Collij, Lyduine

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

10.1002/alz70862_109944 Get It

Abstract Background Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) is often misdiagnosed or conflated with Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) due to overlapping clinical presentations and neuropathological features. The presence of AD‐like features correlates with accelerated cognitive decline and a worse overall prognosis. Compared to AD, studies suggest that amyloid uptake in DLB may spare the occipital lobe. This project aims to investigate whether amyloid PET could be leveraged to differentiate between AD and DLB patients, with the goal of improving diagnostic accuracy and supporting patient stratification and safety in anti‐amyloid trials. Method This study involves collaboration across six centres (University of Geneva, BioFINDER, AMPLE, AMYPAD PNHS, MCSA, GEHC), each contributing amyloid PET imaging data from patients diagnosed with DLB based on clinical or neuropathological assessments. Moreover, each center provided an additional subset of AD and healthy controls, then matched to DLB samples based on age/sex/APOE genotype/education for comparison. A sub analysis will be performed on patients with evidence of both DLB and AD markers. Given the relatively small sample size, key aspect of the methodological approach is to reduce technical sources of variability. The processing workflow includes rigorous quality control, formatting, normalisation to MNI space, harmonisation (differential smoothing), and MRI‐based segmentation. Result The dataset currently includes amyloid PET scans (acquired using [ 11 C]PiB, [ 18 F]Flutemetamol or [ 18 F]Florbetapir) and MRI scans from ∼130 DLB patients, along with ∼150 AD patients and ∼150 controls. In addition, 99 patients positive for the CSF α‐Synuclein Seeding Amplification Assay were included. Patient data were anonymized, and a harmonised database was created, including demographic characteristics, clinical history, and results from neuropsychological assessments. Conclusion The creation of a standardized, multi‐centre amyloid PET dataset for DLB will enable the study of amyloid PET patterns at the global, regional and voxel level, in comparison with uptake in AD patients and controls. This dataset will serve as a valuable resource for investigating the neuropathological underpinnings of DLB, improving diagnostic accuracy, and potentially guiding patient stratification in anti‐amyloid trials. Efforts to integrate [ 18 F]Florbetaben and additional data are ongoing.
Associations of lifestyle factors with amyloid pathology in persons without dementia
Oomens, Julie Elisabeth , Vos, Stephanie J. B. , Maserejian, Nancy N., Didic, Mira , Engelborghs, Sebastiaan , Fladby, Tormod, Fröhlich, Lutz, Gill, Kiran Dip, Grimmer, Timo, Itoh, Yoshiaki , Landau, Susan, Lleó, Alberto, Meyer, Philipp T. , Pardini, Matteo , Rami, Lorena , Reiman, Eric M. , Rinne, Juha O. , Sánchez‐Juan, Pascual, Scarmeas, Nikolaos , Villeneuve, Sylvia , Waldemar, Gunhild , Alcolea, Daniel, Altomare, Daniele , Baldeiras, Inês , Blennow, Kaj , Cerman, Jiří , Chipi, Elena , Day, Gregory S. , Förster, Stefan , Frings, Lars , Guedj, Éric , Habeck, Christian , Hausner, Lucrezia , Jiménez‐Bonilla, J., Juaristi, Arantxa, Kern, Silke , Kirsebom, Bjørn‐Eivind , Legdeur, Nienke , Xiong, Chengjie , Maier, W., Marquié, Marta, Minatani, Shinobu, Prabhakar, Sudesh, Ramakers, Inez H.G.B. , Rodríguez‐Rodríguez, Eloy , Ruiz, Agustín, Rüther, E., Sakhardande, Jayant, Selnes, Per, Spiru, Luiza , Vermunt, Lisa , Wallin, Åsa K., Zettergren, Anna , (ADNI), for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, group, A4 Study, (DIAN), Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network, (KBASE), Japan Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (J-ADNI), Korean Brain Aging Study for the Early Diagnosis and Prediction of Alzheimer's Disease, Ossenkoppele, Rik, Verhey, Frans RJ, Visser, Pieter Jelle, Jansen, Willemijn J, Marquié, Marta , Selnes, Per , Day, Gregory S , Xiong, Chengjie , Oomens, Julie E , Boada, Merçé , Fladby, Tormod , Flier, Wiesje M. van der , Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Fröhlich, Lutz, Grimmer, Timo , Hort, Jakub , Iwatsubo, Takeshi , Klimkowicz‐Mrowiec, Aleksandra , Lee, Dong Young , Lleó, Alberto , Martínez‐Lage, Pablo , Mendonça, Alexandre de , Parchi, Piero , Parnetti, Lucilla , Popp, Julius , Rodrigue, Karen M. , Santana, Isabel , Scheltens, Philip , Skoog, Ingmar , Sperling, Reisa Anne , Stern, Yaakov , Wiltfang, Jens , Zetterberg, Henrik , Alcolea, Daniel , Allegri, Ricardo , Bateman, Randall J. , Baiardi, Simone , Braber, Anouk den , Buchem, Mark A. van , Byun, Min Soo , Chen, Kewei , Drzezga, Alexander E. , Ekblad, Laura L. , Fortea, Juan , Freund‐Levi, Yvonne , Handels, Ron , Hellwig, Sabine , Kandimalla, Ramesh , Kornhuber, Johannes , Morbelli, Silvia , Mroczko, Barbara , Ntanasi, Eva , Oliveira, Catarina Resende , Orellana, Adelina , Peters, Oliver , Ruiz, Agustı́n , Silva, Dina , Soininen, Hilkka S. , Takeda, Akitoshi , Teunissen, Charlotte E. , Tijms, Betty M. , Wiels, Wietse A. , Yannakoulia, Mary , Yi, Dahyun , (ADNI), for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, group, A4 Study, (DIAN), Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network, (KBASE), Japan Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (J-ADNI), Korean Brain Aging Study for the Early Diagnosis and Prediction of Alzheimer's Disease, Ossenkoppele, Rik, Verhey, Frans R.J. , Visser, Pieter Jelle , Jansen, Willemijn J.

Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease | November 14, 2025 | Volume: 108 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 1043-1059

10.1177/13872877251379083 | PMID 41234025 Get It

Background The association between lifestyle factors and Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology remains incompletely understood. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the association of alcohol consumption, smoking behavior, sleep quality and physical, cognitive, and social activity with cerebral amyloid pathology. Methods For this cross-sectional study, we selected participants from the Amyloid Biomarker Study data pooling initiative. We used generalized estimating equations to assess associations of dichotomized lifestyle measures with amyloid pathology. Results We included 9171 participants with normal cognition (NC) and 2555 participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from the Amyloid Biomarker Study. Of participants with NC, 58% were women, 34% were APOE ε4 carrier, and 27% had amyloid pathology. Of participants with MCI, 48% were women, 47% were APOE ε4 carrier, and 57% had amyloid pathology. In NC, cognitively active participants were less likely to have amyloid pathology (OR = 0.77, 95%CI 0.66–0.89, p < 0.001). In MCI, participants who had ever smoked or had sleep problems were less likely to have amyloid pathology (OR = 0.85, 95%CI 0.73–0.99, p = 0.029; OR = 0.62, 95%CI 0.45–0.86, p = 0.004). Conclusions In NC, cognitive activity was associated with a lower frequency of amyloid pathology. In MCI, favorable lifestyle behaviors were not associated with a lower frequency of amyloid pathology. The results of the current study contribute to the broader evidence base on lifestyle and AD by further characterizing the role of lifestyle behaviors in AD pathology across different clinical stages.
Frequency and Clinical Outcomes Associated With Tau Positron Emission Tomography Positivity
Raghavan, Sheelakumari, Costoya‐Sánchez, Alejandro , Mainta, Ismini , Rodríguez-Fonseca, Omar Darío, Perissinotti, Andrés , Gu, Yuna , Yun, Jihwan, Peretti, Débora Elisa , Aguiar, Pablo , Bischof, Gérard N. , Seo, Sang Won , Villeneuve, Sylvia , O’Brien, John T. , Jagust, William, Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Carrillo, Marı́a C., Joie, Renaud La , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Apostolova, Liana G. , Pontecorvo, Michael J. , Johnson, Keith A. , Weiner, Michael W. , Petersen, Ronald C., Jack, Clifford R. , Schöll, Michael , Labonté, Anne , Faubert, Anne‐Marie, Mathieu, Axel, Madjar, Cécile , Carrier, Charles Edouard, Kazazian, Christina, Lepage, Claude, Maillet, David , Michaud, Diane, Couture, Doris, Dea, Doris, Courcot, Blandine, Debacker, Clément , Fontaine, David, Knopman, David S. , Multhaup, Gerhard, Maltais, Jean‐Robert, Breitner, John C.S. , Poirier, Judes, Cheewakriengkrai, Laksanun, Sager, Mark A., Dauar‐Tedeschi, Marina, Rajah, Natasha, Aisen, Paul, Toussaint, Paule‐Joanne , Pierre, Bellec, Kostopoulos, Penelope, Étienne, Pierre , Tariot, Pierre N. , Orban, Pierre , Hoge, Rick, Thomas, Ronald J. , Gauthier, Serge , Craft, Suzanne , Montine, Thomas J. , Nair, Vasavan, Bohbot, Véronique D. , Venugopalan, Vinod, Ituria‐Medina, Yasser, Khachaturian, Zaven S., Teigner, Eduard, Anthal, Elena, Yu, Elsa, Ferdinand, Fabiola, Pogossova, Galina, Mayrand, Ginette, Duclair, Guerda, Gagné, Guylaine, Newbold‐Fox, Holly, Leppert, Illana, Tremblay‐Mercier, Jennifer , Frenette, Joanne, Frappier, Josée, Kat, Justin, Miron, Justin , Wan, Karen, Mahar, Laura, Carmo, Leopoldina, Théroux, Louise, Dufour, Marianne, Lafaille‐Magnan, Marie‐Élyse, Savard, Mélissa, Tuwaig, Miranda, Petkova, Mirela, Rioux, Pierre, Meyer, P.T., El‐Khoury, Rana, Gordon, Renee, Giles, Renuka, Das, Samir, Wang, Seqian, Tabrizi, Shirin , Mathotaarachchi, Sulantha , Dubuc, Sylvie, Lee, Tanya , Beaudry, Thomas, Gervais, Valérie, Pagé, Véronique, Desautels, René, Benbouhoud, Fatiha, Saint‐Fort, Eunice Farah, Verfaillie, Sander C.J. , Farzin, Sarah , Salaciak, Alyssa , Tullo, Stéphanie , Daoust, Leslie‐Ann, Köbe, Theresa , McSweeney, Melissa, Nilsson, Nathalie , Pishnamazi, Morteza, Bedetti, Christophe , Hudon, Louise, Greco, Claudia, Chapleau, Marianne , St‐Onge, Frédéric , Boutin, Sophie , Geddes, Maiya R. , Ducharme, Simon , Jean, Gabriel, Sylvain, Elisabeth, Élie, Marie‐Josee, Leblond‐Baccichet, Gloria, Soucy, Jean‐Paul , Ozlen, Hazal , Bailly, Julie, Mohammediyan, Béry, Chen, Yalin , Remz, Jordana, Rentz, Dorene M., Amariglio, Rebecca E. , Blacker, Deborah , Chhatwal, Jasmeer P. , Dickerson, Brad C., Donovan, Nancy J. , Farrell, Michelle E. , Gómez, Cristina Lois, Marshall, Gad A. , Oaoo, Kate, Price, Julie, Prokopiou, Prokopis C. , Reynolds, Gretchen , Skylar-Scott, Irina A., Vila‐Castelar, Clara , Yang, Hyun‐Sik , Trojanowki, John Q., Green, Robert C, Perrin, Richard J. , Shaw, Leslie M. , Potter, William Z. , Bernard, Marie , Jackson, Jonathan, Masliah, Eliezer , Masterman, Donna, Okonkwo, Ozioma, Ryan, Laurie, Silverberg, Nina, Fleisher, Adam , Fockler, Juliet , Conti, Cat, Jin, Chengshi , Nosheny, Rachel L. , Ashford, Mariam, Flenniken, Derek , Kormos, Adrienne, Montine, Tom, Rafii, Michael, Raman, Rema , Gessert, Devon, Salazar, Jennifer, Zimmerman, Caileigh, Cabrera, Yuliana, Walter, Sarah , Miller, Garrett, Coker, Godfrey, Clanton, Taylor, Hergesheimer, Lindsey, Smith, Stephanie , Adegoke, Olusegun, Mahboubi, Payam, Moore, Shelley, Pizzola, Jeremy, Shaffer, Elizabeth , Harvey, Danielle, Forghanian-Arani, Arvin, Borowski, Bret, Ward, Chad, Gunter, Jeff, Kantarci, Kejal, Thompson, Paul , Jahanshad, Neda , DeCarli, Charles , Knaack, Alexander , Fletcher, Evan, Chen, Stephanie R, Choe, Mark, Crawford, Karen , Yuschkevich, Paul A, Reiman, Eric M. , Mathis, Chet, Landau, Susan , Cairns, Nigel J. , Householder, Erin, Franklin, Erin , Bernhardt, Haley, Taylor‐Reinwald, Lisa, Korecka, Magdalena , Figurski, Michal, Neu, Scott, Nho, Kwangsik, Foroud, Tatiana M., Faber, Kelley , Wilmes, Kristi, Thal, Leon J., Dage, Jeffrey L. , Eloyan, Ani , Hammers, Dustin B. , Kirby, Kala, Kramer, Joel, Legarde, Julien, Murray, Melissa E., Newell, Kathy L. , Taurone, Alexander, Thangarajah, Maryanne, Touroutoglou, Alexandra , Clark, David , Day, Gregory S, Duara, Ranjan , Graff-Radford, Neill R, Grant, Ian , Masdeu, Joseph C. , Mendez, Mario F. , Onyike, Chiadi U. , Riddle, Meghan , Rogalskı, Emily , Salloway, Steven, Sha, Sharon J. , Carrillo, María C. , O'Brien, John Tiernan , Jack, Clifford R , Schöll, Michael , La Joie, Renaud , Rabinovici, Gil D , Dage, Jeffrey L , Rial, Alexis Moscoso , Heeman, Fiona , Raghavan, Sheelakumari , Essen, Martijn van , Camacho, Valle , Silva‐Rodríguez, Jesús , Ribaldi, Federica , Coomans, Emma M. , Brum, Wagner Scheeren , Grothe, Michel J. , Drzezga, Alexander E. , Malpetti, Maura , Rowe, James B. , Giessen, Elsmarieke van de , Ossenkoppele, Rik , Smith, Ruben , Hansson, Oskar , Garibotto, Valentina , Dickerson, Bradford Clark , LaMontagne, Pamela , Sperling, Reisa Anne , Vemuri, Prashanthi , Tam, Angela , Binette, Alexa Pichet , Dansereau, Christian , Picard, Cynthia , Michaud, Diane, Couture, Doris, Cuello, A. Claudio , Barkun, Alan , Evans, Alan Charles , Tardif, Christine Lucas , Knopman, David S. , Near, Jamie , Leoutsakos, Jeannie‐Marie , Brandt, Jason , Pruessner, Jens C. , Morris, John C. , Collins, D. Louis , Chakravarty, M. Mallar , Eisenberg, Mark Jeffrey , Rajah, Maria Natasha , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Bellec, Pierre , Thomas, Ronald, Fonov, Vladimir , Vallee, Isabelle, Vogel, Jacob W. , Dadar, Mahsa , Appleby, Melissa , Meyer, Pierre‐François, Gonneaud, Julie , Pascoal, Tharick Ali , Vachon‐Presseau, Étienne , Spreng, R. Nathan , Rentz, Dorene M. , Buckley, Rachel F. , Gagliardi, Geoffroy Pierre , Gatchel, Jennifer R. , Guzmán‐Vélez, Edmarie , Jacobs, Heidi I.L. , Jutten, Roos J. , Pardilla‐Delgado, Enmanuelle , Price, Julie C. , Quiroz, Yakeel T. , Schultz, Aaron P. , Schultz, Stephanie A. , Sepulcre, Jorge , Vannini, Patrizia , Toga, Arthur W. , Beckett, Laurel , Saykin, Andrew J. , Potter, William, Barnes, Lisa L. , Gonzalez, Hector, Ho, Carole , Hsiao, John , Jackson, Jonathan , Veitch, Dallas P. , Neuhaus, John M , Rafii, Michael S. , Jimenez‐Maggiora, Gustavo Adolfo , Donohue, Michael , Arani, Arvin , Schwarz, Christopher G. , Jones, David T. , Kantarci, Kejal , Senjem, Matthew L. , Reid, Robert I. , Fox, Nick C. , Malone, Ian B. , Thomopoulos, Sophia I. , Nir, Talia M. , Tosun, Duygu , Das, Sandhitsu R. , Koeppe, Robert A. , Chen, Kewei , Risacher, Shannon L. , Shen, Li , Nudelman, Kelly , Ghetti, Bernardino , Grinberg, Lea T. , Hammers, Dustin B , Kirby, Kala, Kukull, Walter A. , Murray, Melissa E. , Polsinelli, Angelina J. , Atri, Alireza , Duara, Ranjan , Graff‐Radford, Neill R. , Honig, Lawrence S. , Johnson, Erik C. B. , Masdeu, Joseph C , Musiek, Erik , Salloway, Steve , Turner, Raymond Scott , Wingo, Thomas S , Wolk, S. J. , Womack, Kyle

JAMA | June 16, 2025 | Volume: 334 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 229

10.1001/jama.2025.7817 | PMID 40522652 Get It

Importance Tau positron emission tomography (PET) allows in vivo detection of neurofibrillary tangles, a core neuropathologic feature of Alzheimer disease (AD). Objective To provide estimates of the frequency of tau PET positivity and its associated risk of clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants Longitudinal study using data pooled from 21 cohorts, comprising a convenience sample of 6514 participants from 13 countries, collected between January 2013 and June 2024. Cognitively unimpaired individuals and patients with a clinical diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), AD dementia, or other neurodegenerative disorders were included. Exposures Tau PET with flortaucipir F 18, amyloid-β (Aβ) PET, and clinical examinations. Tau PET scans were visually rated as positive according to a US Food and Drug Administration– and European Medicines Agency–approved method, designed to indicate the presence of advanced neurofibrillary tangle pathology (Braak stages V-VI). Main Outcomes and Measures Frequency of tau PET positivity and absolute risk of clinical progression (eg, progression to MCI or dementia). Results Among the 6514 participants (mean age, 69.5 years; 50.5% female), median follow-up time ranged from 1.5 to 4.0 years. Of 3487 cognitively unimpaired participants, 349 (9.8%) were tau PET positive; the estimated frequency of tau PET positivity was less than 1% in those aged younger than 50 years, and increased from 3% (95% CI, 2%-4%) at 60 years to 19% (95% CI, 16%-24%) at 90 years. Tau PET positivity frequency estimates increased across MCI and AD dementia clinical diagnoses (43% [95% CI, 41%-46%] and 79% [95% CI, 77%-82%] at 75 years, respectively). Most tau PET–positive individuals (92%) were also Aβ PET positive. Cognitively unimpaired participants who were positive for both Aβ PET and tau PET had a higher absolute risk of progression to MCI or dementia over the following 5 years (57% [95% CI, 45%-71%]) compared with both Aβ PET–positive/tau PET–negative (17% [95% CI, 13%-22%]) and Aβ PET–negative/tau PET–negative (6% [95% CI, 5%-8%]) individuals. Among participants with MCI at the time of the tau PET scan, an Aβ PET–positive/tau PET–positive profile was associated with a 5-year absolute risk of progression to dementia of 70% (95% CI, 59%-81%). Conclusions and Relevance In a large convenience sample, a positive tau PET scan occurred at a nonnegligible rate among cognitively unimpaired individuals, and the combination of Aβ PET positivity and tau PET positivity was associated with a high risk of clinical progression in both preclinical and symptomatic stages of AD. These findings underscore the potential of tau PET as a biomarker for staging AD pathology.
The science does not yet support regulatory approval of amyloid‐targeting therapies for Alzheimer's disease based solely on biomarker evidence
Planche, Vincent , Knopman, David S., Frisoni, Giovanni B. , Schneider, Lon S. , Karlawish, Jason , Villain, Nicolas , Schindler, Suzanne E. , Galasko, Douglas , Grill, Joshua D.

Alzheimer's & Dementia | April 17, 2025 | Volume: 21 | Issue: 4 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.70068 | PMID 40243238 Get It