Young, Christina B.

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.

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.

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.

Abstract INTRODUCTION We standardized positron emission tomography (PET) data across multiple cohorts and tracers to characterize the frequency of amyloid and tau PET severity along the clinical continuum. METHODS Clinical stage was defined using cohort‐specific criteria and included cognitively unimpaired (CU), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia. Amyloid severity was staged using Centiloids (CL). Tau severity was staged using a hierarchical Braak‐based schema. The cumulative probabilities of PET‐based stages were estimated using ordinal logistic regressions. RESULTS Among 10,396 individuals (mean [standard deviation] age: 71.9 [7.1] years), amyloid levels ≥ 25 CL increased with age among CU and MCI, while amyloid levels ≥ 100 CL were most common in dementia. In 3295 with tau PET, tau severity increased with amyloid and clinical stage and showed complex associations with age. Within each clinical stage, the full spectrum of amyloid and tau PET severity was observed. DISCUSSION PET‐based staging revealed heterogeneous amyloid and tau burden along the clinical continuum. Highlights PET‐based staging is feasible across multiple cohorts and PET tracers. There is heterogeneity in amyloid and tau severity across the clinical spectrum. The frequency of amyloid and tau PET severity increased with clinical severity. The likelihood of tau PET severity differed by age, amyloid, and clinical severity.

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.