Citations

Clear

151 citation(s) found for "Jagust, William".

The Consortium for Clarity in ADRD Research Through Imaging (CLARiTI): Overview of consortium sites and anticipated enrollment
Oomens, Julie Elisabeth , Biber, Sarah , Albert, Marilyn, Alosco, Michael L. , Arfanakis, Konstantinos , Brewer, James B., Chin, Erin, Clark, Lindsay R. , Cohen, Ann D. , Dage, Jeffrey L. , Detre, John A. , DiFilippo, Frank P. , Dyck, Christopher H. van , Grabowski, Thomas J. , Habes, Mohamad, Hedden, Trey , Jagust, William, Jefferson, Angela L. , Kecskemeti, Steven , Kantarci, Kejal, Keene, Dirk, Knoefel, Janice E. , Lin, Weili, Masurkar, Arjun V. , Morhardt, Darby, Okonkwo, Ozioma C. , Rabinovici, Gil D. , Rahman‐Filipiak, Annalise , Reiman, Eric M., Risacher, Shannon L. , Rosen, Howie, Schneider, Lon S. , Song, Allen W. , Swerdlow, Russell H. , Vaillancourt, David E. , Villemagne, Victor L. , Qiu, Deqiang , Foroud, Tatiana, Mormino, Elizabeth C. , Kantarci, Kejal , Oomens, Julie E , Kantarci, Kejal , Rabinovici, Gil D , Dage, Jeffrey L , Cohen, Annie , Benzinger, Tammie L.S. , Burns, Jeffrey M. , Chin, Nathaniel A. , Dickerson, Bradford Clark , Donohue, Michael , Fan, Audrey Peiwen , Habes, Mohamad , Harrison, Theresa M. , Hohman, Timothy J. , Jicha, Gregory A. , Kukull, Walter A. , Lin, Weili , Lao, Patrick , Lepping, Rebecca J. , Levendovszky, Swati Rane , McConathy, Jonathan , Mindt, Mónica Rivera , Noll, Douglas C. , Parrish, Todd B. , Reiman, Eric M. , Rudolph, Marc D. , Silbert, Lisa C. , Stark, Craig E.L. , Thompson, Paul M. , Wolk, S. J. , Johnson, Sterling C.

Mayo Clinic

Alzheimer's & Dementia | November 10, 2025 | Volume: 21 | Issue: 11 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.70880 | PMID 41208739 Get It

Abstract INTRODUCTION The Consortium for Clarity in Alzheimer's disease related dementias (ADRD) Research Through Imaging (CLARiTI) is a study that aims to collect standardized imaging and plasma biomarkers on 2000 Clinical Core participants enrolled across all Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers (ADRC) sites. We sought to summarize the known heterogeneity across centers regarding scientific focus and initial enrollment plans for CLARiTI. METHODS We developed and distributed a survey capturing information on the 36 CLARiTI site's theme/expertise, recruitment plans, and the intersection of CLARiTI with other ADRC imaging efforts. RESULTS Anticipated CLARiTI enrollees spanned 11 different categories of suspected etiologies underlying impairment. A wide range of risk factors were endorsed across sites regarding the enrollment of unimpaired individuals. Variability also existed regarding site‐level strategies in enrollment into CLARiTI versus other imaging efforts. DISCUSSION We anticipate that the 2000 individuals that will enroll into CLARiTI will reflect the clinical heterogeneity already in place across the ADRC network. Highlights The ADRC Consortium for Clarity in ADRD Research Through Imaging (CLARiTI) will leverage and contribute to the existing Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers (ADRC) program by supporting standardized imaging and plasma collection across all centers. We summarize the variation in scientific focus and enrollment plans across ADRC sites participating in CLARiTI. The anticipated CLARiTI cohort will reflect the clinical heterogeneity that already exists across the ADRC network. CLARiTI will contribute to scientific goals related to the detection of multi‐etiological signatures relevant for Alzheimer's disease and related disorders (ADRDs).
Beyond Alzheimer’s disease—translating biomarker insights across CNS diseases
Brady, Linda S. , Mahinrad, Simin , Edelmayer, Rebecca M. , Potter, William Z. , Hutten, Samantha J. , Anticevic, Alan , Taylor‐Burds, Carol , Winston, Charisse N. , Coetzee, Timothy , Paulsen, Jane S. , Mantua, Valentina, Childers, Eva P. , Jack, Clifford R. , Jagust, William J. , Wagner, John A. , Sivakumaran, Sudhir , Shaw, Leslie M. , Jack, Clifford R , Jagust, William J , Wagner, John A , Sivakumaran, Sudhir , Shaw, Leslie , Mahinrad, Simin , Kolb, Hartmuth C. , Sharma, Vikas Mohan

Mayo Clinic

Science Translational Medicine | November 5, 2025 | Volume: 17 | Issue: 823 | Pages: No page available

10.1126/scitranslmed.adr2511 | PMID 41191776 Get It

Decades of research on biomarker identification and integration in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have helped to advance biologically driven disease models, disease subtypes, and disease-modifying treatments. Key lessons learned from AD biomarker development include the need for integration of new biological insights, investment in large cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, a multicomponent biomarker approach, and recruitment of clinical trial cohorts and biosamples that are representative of the target population. We describe how these lessons are being applied in Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s disease, multiple sclerosis, and psychotic disorders as use cases to inform biomarker-based approaches across central nervous system disorders.
Plasma Phosphorylated Tau 217 to Identify Preclinical Alzheimer Disease
Janelidze, Shorena, Bali, Divya , Dolado, Anna Orduña , Binette, Alexa Pichet , Rahmouni, Nesrine , Blennow, Kaj, Doré, Vincent , Feizpour, Azadeh , Rowe, Christopher C., Villeneuve, Sylvia , Petersen, Ronald C., Jack, Clifford R. , Groups, ADNI, ALFA, and PREVENT-AD Study, Adegoke, Olusegun, Hussen, Kedir Adem, Aisen, Paul, Ajayi, Adeyinka, Amaza, Hannatu, Apostolova, Liana G. , Ashford, Miriam T. , Ayo, Omobolanle, Bernard, Marie , Bernhardt, Haley, Boatwright, Virginia, Borowski, Bret, Brylska, Magdalena, Buckholtz, Neil, Cabrera, Yuliana, Cairns, Nigel J. , Carrillo, Maria, Choe, Mark, Clanton, Taylor, Conti, Cat, Craft, Hannah, Crawford, Karen , DeCarli, Charles , Benedetto, Joseph Di, Diaz, Adam , Drake, Erin, Faber, Kelley, Felmlee, Joel P. , Fidell, Andrea, Flenniken, Derek , Fockler, Juliet , Forghanian-Arani, Arvin, Frank, R.T., Franklin, Erin , Glittenberg, Matt, Gunter, Jeff, Guzmán, Vanessa , Harvey, Danielle, Hedberg, Caitie, Hergesheimer, Lindsey, Hoang, Isabella, Jackson, Jonathan , Jagust, William, Jahanshad, Neda , Jenkins, Cecily, Jiménez, Gustavo , Jin, Chengshi , Kachaturian, Zaven, Kaddurah-Daouk, Rima, Kantarci, Kejal, Karlawish, Jason , Khachaturian, Zaven S., Knaack, Alexander , Korecka, Magdalena , Kormos, Adrienne, Germano, Kaori Kubo, Kwang, Winnie, Lacy, Kaci, Landau, Susan, Lopresti, Brian J. , Magana, Fabiola, Mahboubi, Payam, Malone, Ian G., Masliah, Eliezer , Masterman, Donna, Matoush, Leonard, Miller, Melanie J. , Molchan, Susan, Montine, Tom, Moore-Weiss, John, Neu, Scott, Nosheny, Rachel L. , Ogwang, Sheila, Okonkwo, Ozioma, Parkins, Shaniya, Perrin, Richard J. , Petersen, Ronald, Pizzola, Jeremy, Potter, Zoë, Potter, William Z., Rafii, Michael, Raman, Rema , Reyes, Calvin, Reyes, Denise , Robison, Justin , Chen, Stephanie Rossi, Ryan, Laurie, Sachdev, Pallavi, Saito, Naomi , Salazar, Jennifer, Thao, Mai Seng, Shaffer, Elizabeth , Shaw, Leslie M. , Silverberg, Nina, Strong, Joe, Talavera, Sandra , Taylor‐Reinwald, Lisa, Thal, Leon J., Thomas, Lisa , Thompson, Paul , Tosun, Duygu , Trojanowki, John Q., Sacrey, Diana Truran, Villemagne, Victor L. , Walter, Sarah , Wan, Yang , Ward, Chad, Webb, Caitlin, Weiner, Michael W. , Weisensel, Trinity, Zimmerman, Caileigh, Poirier, Judes, Breitner, John C.S. , Badawy, Mohamed , Baril, Andrée‐Ann, Aguilar, Ricardo A, Gorriti, Annabella B, Gispert, Lidia C, Martinez, Alba C, Iglesias, Ruth D, Julian, Sherezade F, Serra, P, González‐Escalante, Armand , Penas, Laura H, Rodriguez, Gema H, Ninou, Jordi H, Gamaz, Laura Iglesias, Knezevic, Iva, Alvarez, Paula M, Diaz, Tania M, Palacios, Eva , Ballester, A, Mendez, Sandra P, Freixedes, Laura Ros, Vila, Aleix S, Harster, Lluis S, Prat, Anna S, Jaramillo, Marc V, Jack, Clifford R , Feizpour, Azadeh , Doré, Vincent , Pichet Binette, Alexa , Salvadó, Gemma , Janelidze, Shorena , Therriault, Joseph , Brum, Wagner Scheeren , Stomrud, Erik , Mattsson, Niklas , Palmqvist, Sebastian , Coomans, Emma M. , Teunissen, Charlotte E. , Flier, Wiesje M. van der , Benzinger, Tammie L.S. , Gispert, Juan Domingo , Blennow, Kaj , Alcolea, Daniel , Fortea, Juan , Johnson, Sterling C. , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Schindler, Suzanne E. , Suárez‐Calvet, Marc , Ossenkoppele, Rik , Hansson, Oskar , Groups, ADNI, ALFA, and PREVENT-AD Study, Aisen, Paul , Barnes, Lisa L. , Beckett, Laurel , Das, Sandhitsu R. , Donohue, Michael , Drake, Erin, Erickson, Claire M. , Fletcher, Evan M. , Arani, Arvin , Foroud, Tatiana , Fox, Nick C. , Frank, Richard, González, Hector, Green, Robert C. , Grill, Joshua D. , Harkins, Kristin , Ho, Carole , Hsiao, John , Jo, Taeho, Kaddurah‐Daouk, Rima , Kantarci, Kejal , Koeppe, Robert A. , Largent, Emily A. , Lee, Edward B. , Lee, Virginia M.‐Y. , Morris, John C. , Nho, Kwangsik T. , Nir, Talia M. , Nudelman, Kelly , Okonkwo, Ozioma, Petersen, Ronald, Rabinovici, Gil D. , Rafii, Michael S. , Reid, Robert, Reyes, Denise, Risacher, Shannon L. , Mindt, Mónica Rivera , Sachdev, Pallavi, Saykin, Andrew J. , Schwarz, Christopher G. , Senjem, Matthew L. , Li, Shen , Smith, Stephanie R. , Snyder, Peter J. , Thomopoulos, Sophia I. , Toga, Arthur W. , Vemuri, Prashanthi , Yushkevich, Paul A. , Badawy, Mohamed, Baillet, Sylvain , Minguillón, Carolina , Brugulat‐Serrat, Anna , Cacciaglia, Raffaele , Campo, Marta del , Pascual, Maria, Rodríguez‐Fernández, Blanca , Vilor‐Tejedor, Natàlia

Mayo Clinic

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

10.1001/jamaneurol.2025.3217 | PMID 40952756 Get It

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.
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

Mayo Clinic

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.
2024 Alzheimer's Association criteria for Alzheimer's disease diagnosis are usually anchored to both plaques and tangles, not Aβ alone
Jack, Clifford R. , Knopman, David S., Wiste, Heather J. , Jagust, William J. , Murray, Melissa E., Boon, Baayla D.C. , Lowe, Val J. , Graff‐Radford, Jon, Petersen, Ronald , Murray, Melissa E. , Jack, Clifford R , Murray, Melissa E , Sperling, Reisa Anne , Johnson, Derek R. , Burkett, Brian J. , Cogswell, Petrice M. , Graff‐Radford, Jonathan , Vemuri, Prashanthi

Mayo Clinic

Alzheimer's & Dementia | April 25, 2025 | Volume: 21 | Issue: 4 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.70184 | PMID 40276985 Get It

Role of tau versus TDP‐43 pathology on medial temporal lobe atrophy in aging and Alzheimer's disease
Wisse, Laura E.M. , Wuestefeld, Anika , Murray, Melissa E., Jagust, William J. , Joie, Renaud La , La Joie, Renaud , Murray, Melissa E.

Mayo Clinic

Alzheimer's & Dementia | February 22, 2025 | Volume: 21 | Issue: 2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.14582 | PMID 39985478 Get It

Abstract Hippocampal atrophy on magnetic resonance imaging is an important biomarker in Alzheimer's disease (AD). While hippocampal atrophy was thought to result from tau tangles in AD, different neuropathologies can lead to hippocampal atrophy, especially TAR DNA‐binding protein 43 (TDP‐43) pathology. In this narrative review, we evaluate existing studies on the relative contribution of tau and TDP‐43 pathology to medial temporal lobe (MTL) atrophy. We report a clear association of both tau and TDP‐43 neuropathology with MTL atrophy, even after correcting for other neuropathologies. Next, we discuss a potential synergism between tau and TDP‐43 and the relative timing of the effects of both neuropathologies. Finally, avenues for future research will be discussed. A better understanding of the interplay between tau and TDP‐43 neuropathologies and their effect on atrophy will help with the development of more specific biomarkers for limbic‐predominant age‐related TDP‐43 encephalopathy and pinpointing of the optimal timing for testing anti‐tau and anti‐TDP‐43 treatments in trials. Highlights Both tau and TAR DNA‐binding protein 43 (TDP‐43) pathology contribute to medial temporal lobe atrophy. There is a positive association between tau and TDP‐43 and potentially a synergism. It is unclear if tau and TDP‐43 have an additive or synergistic effect on atrophy. The relative timing of the tau and TDP‐43 effects on atrophy remains unclear. Clarifying the interplay between tau and TDP‐43 will help improve magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers.
Association between Default Mode Network Connectivity Compared Between Two Tau Tracers (Flortaucipir vs. MK6240) – HEAD Study
Lowe, Val J. , Oh, Hwamee , Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Jagust, William, Baker, Suzanne L. , Karim, Helmet Talib , Povala, Guilherme , Bauer‐Negrini, Guilherme , Lussier, Firoza Zubeida , Pascual, Belén , Gordon, Brian A. , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Klunk, William E. , Pascoal, Tharick Ali

Mayo Clinic

Alzheimer's & Dementia | January 9, 2025 | Volume: 20 | Issue: S2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.093082 Get It

AbstractBackgroundDefault mode network (DMN) resting state connectivity has been correlated with heightened amyloid and tau – hallmarks of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). Tau is postulated to impact a meta‐temporal area including DMN‐associated regions like amygdala, entorhinal cortex, fusiform gyrus, parahippocampus, inferior temporal, and middle temporal gyrus. We recruited individuals with varying cognitive status to undergo resting state connectivity and imaging with two tau tracers (Flortaucipir and MK6240). We investigated the association between DMN connectivity and both global and regional (meta‐temporal) tau.MethodsWe studied 149 adults who were young cognitively healthy (n=10, 21‐25 years, 5F), older cognitively healthy (n=85, 50‐83 years, 51F), had MCI (n=43, 53‐84 years, 23F), or had AD (n=11, 62‐84, 6F). All individuals underwent resting state imaging and PET imaging with both Flortaucipir and MK6240 tau tracers. Resting data was preprocessed and DMN connectivity was estimated using bilateral posterior cingulate gyrus as region of interest. Tau tracer uptake was preprocessed (Pascoal. et al), and voxel‐wise standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) was computed using inferior cerebellar gray matter as reference. We computed universal and meta‐temporal uptake for both tracers. We conducted four voxel‐wise associations between DMN connectivity and uptake in each tracer. We corrected for multiple comparisons using SnPM13 to estimate non‐parametric p‐values (10,000 permutations), we used a cluster forming threshold of p=0.001 and corrected for multiple comparisons by controlling the family‐wise error rate (FWE) at p=0.05.ResultsGreater universal Flortaucipir uptake was associated with lower within‐network DMN connectivity (bilateral posterior cingulate, precuneus, angular/supramarginal gyrus, and inferior parietal) but greater between‐network DMN connectivity (superior parietal, postcentral gyrus; Figure 1A). Greater universal MK6240 uptake was associated only with greater DMN‐cerebellum connectivity (Figure 1B). Greater meta‐temporal Flortaucipir was associated with lower within‐network DMN connectivity similar to universal uptake with addition of medial prefrontal cortex and middle temporal gyrus (Figure 2A). Greater meta‐temporal MK6240 was only associated with greater DMN‐superior parietal connectivity (Figure 2B).ConclusionsThese preliminary findings show that uptake using different tau tracers may lead to varying conclusions on association with connectivity. This may have implications for understanding the role of tau in altering resting state connectivity findings.
Exploring the effects of using multiple different cerebellar reference regions to improve tau‐PET harmonization ‐ The HEAD Study
Tsai, Hsin‐Yeh, Amaral, Lívia , Tudorascu, Dana , Jagust, William J. , Lowe, Val J. , Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Oh, Hwamee , Baker, Suzanne L. , Bauer‐Negrini, Guilherme , Povala, Guilherme , Bellaver, Bruna , Lussier, Firoza Zubeida , Tissot, Cécile , Tsai, Hsin‐Yeh, Ferreira, Pâmela C.L. , Klunk, William E. , Pascual, Belén , Gordon, Brian A. , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Pascoal, Tharick Ali

Mayo Clinic

Alzheimer's & Dementia | January 9, 2025 | Volume: 20 | Issue: S2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.092768 Get It

AbstractBackgroundTau‐PET tracers have been used to diagnose and stage Alzheimer’s disease. However, different tau tracers present distinct patterns of binding throughout the brain, challenging the harmonization of their results. We hypothesize that the choice of a reference region can impact the harmonization of the tau‐PET standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR). In this context, we aimed to explore how different cerebellar reference regions impact the association between [18F]Flortaucipir and [18F]MK‐6240 SUVR values.MethodWe studied 185 individuals across the aging and AD spectrum with head‐to‐head Flortaucipir and MK‐6240 tau PET (HEAD Study). SUVRs were processed to a common 8mm FWHM using 15 different reference regions defined in the spatially unbiased atlas template of the cerebellum (SUIT) (Diedrichsen, 2009). Regression models investigated the association between Flortaucipir and MK‐6240 using multiple combinations of reference regions. R2 statistic was used to estimate goodness‐of‐fitting.Result225 combinations of associations Flortaucipir and MK‐6240 SUVR were tested, where the SUVRs are not necessarily quantified using the same reference region. Figure 1 presents the top 25 strongest and 25 weakest associations, ordered based on the coefficient of determination (R²). Flortaucipir and MK‐6240 exhibited the most robust associations when the inferior cerebellar gray matter or Crus I were employed for SUVR determination (R2=0.89, Figure 1‐2). Conversely, combinations incorporating the fastigial region consistently yielded weaker associations between the two tracers (R2<0.70, Figure 1‐2).ConclusionInterestingly, we showed that the inferior cerebellum, when used for both tracers, serves as a robust reference region for determining the most similar SUVRs for Flortaucipir and MK‐6240. Notably, these two regions have been commonly utilized in previous studies involving these tau tracers. Our results imply that the inferior cerebellum could be the optimal reference region for research aimed at harmonizing tau PET tracers using statistical scales.
Longitudinal multicenter head‐to‐head harmonization of tau‐PET tracers: an overview of the HEAD study cohort
Amaral, Lívia , Cehula, Juli, Fine, Devin J, Lemaire, Peter Charles , Bloomquist, Madeleine , Lowe, Val J. , Oh, Hwamee , Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Tudorascu, Dana , Jagust, William J. , Baker, Suzanne L. , Lussier, Firoza Zubeida , Povala, Guilherme , Bauer‐Negrini, Guilherme , Fine, Devin J, Pascual, Belén , Gordon, Brian A. , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Klunk, William E. , Pascoal, Tharick Ali

Mayo Clinic

Alzheimer's & Dementia | January 9, 2025 | Volume: 20 | Issue: S2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.091910 Get It

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.
Comparison of [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir standardized uptake values (SUVs): the HEAD study
Tsai, Hsin‐Yeh, Tudorascu, Dana , Rahmouni, Nesrine , Servaes, Stijn , Stevenson, Jenna , Lowe, Val J. , Soleimani‐Meigooni, David N. , Oh, Hwamee , Jagust, William J., Baker, Suzanne L. , Tissot, Cécile , Tsai, Hsin‐Yeh, Lussier, Firoza Zubeida , Therriault, Joseph , Gordon, Brian A. , Pascual, Belén , Klunk, William E. , Rosa-Neto, Pedro , Pascoal, Tharick Ali

Mayo Clinic

Alzheimer's & Dementia | January 9, 2025 | Volume: 20 | Issue: S2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/alz.090568 Get It

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.