Citations 8

Amyloid PET Quantitation and Centiloid Thresholds in the Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease

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

10.1001/jama.2026.13116 | PMID 42441390

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 disease Stage 1 and 2: Biology, diagnostics, and treatment

Alzheimer's & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions | March 12, 2026 | Volume: 12 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/trc2.70216

Abstract Advances in biomarker technology, digital cognitive assessments, and amyloid‐targeting therapies have redefined the opportunities for accurate and early diagnosis and care of Alzheimer's disease (AD). These advances also create new possibilities for intervention before the onset of cognitive impairment. This paradigm shift has increased the focus on Stages 1 and 2 of AD, in which individuals are cognitively unimpaired but exhibit biological evidence of disease. While early identification of AD offers an opportunity to intervene early to delay progression and preserve quality of life, it also presents complex challenges related to communicating diagnostic results to patients and their families, contextualizing the cost effectiveness of early diagnosis and treatment, and implementation of and equitable access to treatments. Recent, successfully enrolled, preclinical AD trials highlight the complex strategies required to identify asymptomatic, biomarker‐positive individuals on a large scale, and demonstrate critical knowledge gaps in inclusion, follow‐up, and long‐term outcome measurement. The Spring 2025 Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) meeting brought together academics, clinicians, industry, and regulatory leaders to exchange perspectives on current challenges, key learnings, and potential strategies for identifying and treating individuals in very early stages of AD, effectively and safely. This paper presents key takeaways from the Spring 2025 AARR meeting. Highlights New criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) enable early identification of AD pathology. Blood tests and digital cognitive assessment tools may facilitate early and personalized care. Plasma biomarkers may be scalable in clinical settings but need confirmation or follow‐up assessments in those individuals with equivocal results. Early therapy shows best results in people with lower initial amyloid and tau burden.
Every Centiloid, from Everywhere, All at Once

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

10.1002/alz70856_107124

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.
Every Centiloid, from Everywhere, All at Once

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

10.1002/alz70862_110011

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.
Plasma Phosphorylated Tau 217 to Identify Preclinical Alzheimer Disease

JAMA Neurology | September 15, 2025 | Volume: 82 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 1122

10.1001/jamaneurol.2025.3217 | PMID 40952756

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

Alzheimer's & Dementia | June 16, 2023 | Volume: 19 | Issue: S3 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.065506

AbstractBackgroundBrain amyloid‐β (Aβ) is the pathological hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). In logistic disease models, Aβ accumulation is a sigmoid function of time‐since‐disease‐onset (TSDO) (figure 1). Previous positron emission tomography (PET)‐based models vary accumulation onset(t50) and duration(r) globally; capacity(K) and baseline(NS) regionally (Whittington2018). We confirm existing approaches and propose a more powerful ICA‐based approach to quantify disease severity and estimate TSDO.MethodWe used 1071 18F‐florbetapir standard uptake value ratio (SUVR) images from the ADNI‐2 study (adni.loni.usc.edu/data‐samples/data‐types/pet). Images were mapped into MNI space. Averages were extracted using the Harvard‐Oxford brain‐atlas. Whole‐brain tracer‐specific sigmoid parameters (Jack2013) obtained from the literature were used to estimate TSDO.Of 16 models of regional Aβ accumulation (each of the 4 regional sigmoid parameters varied either regionally or globally), the optimal Bayesian information criterion was found with global t50 and r, and regional NS and K (figure 1) with global values r = 6.16y and t50 = 4.10y.Linearised maps of NS and K were obtained by regressing the SUVR maps onto the global sigmoid. We also estimated these maps as independent components, using a 2‐component ICA on the SUVR maps. Both outcomes were used to quantify Aβ accumulation from SUVR images as weighting factors of the accumulation map.We compared the weights from the logistic model and the ICA model in ADNI, using effect size measured with Hedges' g between cognitively normal (CN), subjective memory complaints (SMC), mild cognitive impairment (EMCI/MCI/LMCI) and AD groups. We compared 3 longitudinal visits (N = 112) in the OASIS‐3 study (see www.oasis‐brains.org) with both methods, global SUVR and Centiloid (Klunk2015) using 11C‐PiB PET SUVR images.ResultMaps of accumulation capacity from both models had spatial correlation of 0.86 (figure 2); baseline maps had spatial correlation of 0.95. Hedges' g between ADNI groups was 2.25 for K, and 2.42 for ICA (1.46 for global SUVR). In OASIS‐3, Hedges' g between visits was 1.24 for K, 1.46 for ICA (global SUVR 0.15, Centiloid 0.4).ConclusionWe demonstrate that linear accumulation models can be used to quantify brain Aβ with PET; maps obtained by ICA yield larger effect sizes than the logistic method for differentiating groups and measuring changes between visits.
Quantifying AD‐related brain amyloid with linearised progression models: model‐based vs. data‐based.

Alzheimer's & Dementia | December 20, 2022 | Volume: 18 | Issue: S1 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.061452

AbstractBackgroundBrain amyloid‐β (Aβ) is the pathological hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). In logistic disease models, Aβ accumulation is a sigmoid function of time‐since‐disease‐onset (TSDO) (figure 1). Previous positron emission tomography (PET)‐based models vary accumulation onset(t50) and duration(r) globally; capacity(K) and baseline(NS) regionally (Whittington2018). We confirm existing approaches and propose a more powerful ICA‐based approach to quantify disease severity and estimate TSDO.MethodWe used 1071 18F‐florbetapir standard uptake value ratio (SUVR) images from the ADNI‐2 study (adni.loni.usc.edu/data‐samples/data‐types/pet). Images were mapped into MNI space. Averages were extracted using the Harvard‐Oxford brain‐atlas. Whole‐brain tracer‐specific sigmoid parameters (Jack2013) obtained from the literature were used to estimate TSDO.Of 16 models of regional Aβ accumulation (each of the 4 regional sigmoid parameters varied either regionally or globally), the optimal Bayesian information criterion was found with global t50 and r, and regional NS and K (figure 1) with global values r=6.16y and t50=4.10y.Linearised maps of NS and K were obtained by regressing the SUVR maps onto the global sigmoid. We also estimated these maps as independent components, using a 2‐component ICA on the SUVR maps. Both outcomes were used to quantify Aβ accumulation from SUVR images as weighting factors of the accumulation map.We compared the weights from the logistic model and the ICA model in ADNI, using effect size measured with Hedges' g between cognitively normal (CN), subjective memory complaints (SMC), mild cognitive impairment (EMCI/MCI/LMCI) and AD groups. We compared 3 longitudinal visits (N=112) in the OASIS‐3 study (see www.oasis‐brains.org) with both methods, global SUVR and Centiloid (Klunk2015) using 11C‐PiB PET SUVR images.ResultMaps of accumulation capacity from both models had spatial correlation of 0.86 (figure 2); baseline maps had spatial correlation of 0.95. Hedges' g between ADNI groups was 2.25 for K, and 2.42 for ICA (1.46 for global SUVR). In OASIS‐3, Hedges' g between visits was 1.24 for K, 1.46 for ICA (global SUVR 0.15, Centiloid 0.4).ConclusionWe demonstrate that linear accumulation models can be used to quantify brain Aβ with PET; maps obtained by ICA yield larger effect sizes than the logistic method for differentiating groups and measuring changes between visits.
The protective gene dose effect of the APOEε2 allele on gray matter volume in cognitively unimpaired individuals

Alzheimer's & Dementia | December 8, 2021 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 1383-1395

10.1002/alz.12487 | PMID 34877786

AbstractIntroductionHarboring two copies of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε2 allele strongly protects against Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the effect of this genotype on gray matter (GM) volume in cognitively unimpaired individuals has not yet been described.MethodsMulticenter brain magnetic resonance images (MRIs) from cognitively unimpaired ε2 homozygotes were matched (1:1) against all other APOE genotypes for relevant confounders (n = 223). GM volumes of ε2 genotypic groups were compared to each other and to the reference group (APOE ε3/ε3).ResultsCarrying at least one ε2 allele was associated with larger GM volumes in brain areas typically affected by AD and also in areas associated with cognitive resilience. APOE ε2 homozygotes, but not APOE ε2 heterozygotes, showed larger GM volumes in areas related to successful aging.DiscussionIn addition to the known resistance against amyloid‐β deposition, the larger GM volumes in key brain regions may confer APOE ε2 homozygotes additional protection against AD‐related cognitive decline.