Citations

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 INTRODUCTION The Centiloid scale is the standard for amyloid (Aβ) PET quantification in research and clinical settings. However, variability between tracers and scanners remains a challenge. METHODS This study introduces DeepSUVR, a deep learning method to correct Centiloid quantification, by penalizing implausible longitudinal trajectories during training. The model was trained using data from 2,129 participants (7,149 Aβ positron emission tomography [PET] scans) in the Australian Imaging, Biomarkers and Lifestyle Study of ageing (AIBL)/Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and validated using 15,807 Aβ PET scans from 10,543 participants across 10 external datasets. RESULTS DeepSUVR increased correlation between tracers, and reduced variability in the Aß‐negatives. It showed significantly stronger association with cognition, visual reads, neuropathology, and increased longitudinal consistency between studies. DeepSUVR also increased the effect size for detecting small treatment related slowing of amyloid accumulation in the A4 study. DISCUSSION DeepSUVR substantially advances Aβ PET quantification, outperforming all standard approaches, which is particularly important for clinical decision making and to detect subtle or early changes in Aβ. Highlights Novel artificial intelligence (AI)‐method that penalizes biologically implausible longitudinal trajectories, enabling the model to learn standardized uptake value ratios (SUVR) correction factors without requiring longitudinal data at inference time. Improves Centiloid consistency across tracers and studies, significantly enhancing cross‐sectional and longitudinal amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) quantification. DeepSUVR‐derived Centiloids show stronger associations with cognition, visual reads, and neuropathology. Longitudinal variability is reduced three‐ to five‐fold, enabling more reliable tracking of amyloid accumulation and better detection of treatment effects. Novel reference and target masks derived from DeepSUVR replicate most of the model's performance, offering a practical alternative for integration into existing pipelines.

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 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.

Abstract Background Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) seed amplification assays (SAAs) for detecting α‐synuclein (αsyn) seeds have recently emerged as robust in vivo biomarkers of Lewy body pathology (LBP). However, CSF sampling is invasive, costly, and time‐consuming, limiting its widespread use. We aimed to develop and evaluate a neuropathologically‐validated two‐step workflow, leveraging smell function and CSF αsyn SAA to accurately determine postmortem LBP status. This approach could reduce the number of confirmatory lumbar punctures needed (Figure 1). Methods The study included 358 individuals from the Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders with antemortem smell testing, CSF αsyn SAA results, and postmortem neuropathological assessments of regional LBP burden. Step‐1 of the two‐step workflow involved a risk‐stratification model predicting postmortem cortical LBP‐positivity (LBP ctx , defined as at least mild pathology in any cortical region) using logistic regression models with University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) scores (smell testing), age, and sex as predictors. In step‐2, confirmatory CSF αsyn SAA testing was applied only to participants identified as high‐risk in step‐1. Workflow performance ‐ accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and reduction in CSF testing ‐ was evaluated in (i) the entire study cohort; (ii) patients with clinical parkinsonism; (iii) patients with an Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical syndrome; and (iv) clinically unimpaired (CU) individuals. Results Participants had a mean age at death of 86.2±7.8 years, 42.6% were female, 35.2% had LBP ctx , and the average time between UPSIT and death was 3.2±2.3 years (Table 1). Using a 95% sensitivity cut‐off for the UPSIT‐based algorithm, the two‐step workflow achieved high accuracy in identifying LBP ctx (whole cohort=94%; clinical parkinsonism=95%; clinical AD=94%; CU=93%; Figure 2a), while reducing CSF testing (whole cohort=‐43%; clinical parkinsonism=‐23%; clinical AD=‐35%; and CU=‐80%; Figure 2d). PPVs ranged from 75‐96% and were highest in the clinical parkinsonism subgroup (96%) where LBP ctx + was highest (62.7%). NPVs ranged between 95‐98% and were highest in the clinical AD subgroup (98%) (Figure 2b‐c). The two‐step approach reached accuracies similar to using CSF tests in all participants. Conclusions Implementing a two‐step workflow in different clinical scenarios may reduce invasive testing with CSF, minimizing the burden for individuals and costs for healthcare providers.

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 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.

Abstract The Centiloid scale is the standard for Amyloid (Aβ) PET quantification, widely used in research, clinical settings, and trial stratification. However, variability between tracers and scanners remains a challenge. This study introduces DeepSUVR, a deep learning method to correct Centiloid quantification, by penalising implausible longitudinal trajectories during training. The model was trained using data from 2,098 participants (6,762 Aβ PET scans) in AIBL/ADNI and validated using 15,806 Aβ PET scans from 10,543 participants across 10 external datasets. DeepSUVR increased correlation between tracers, and reduced variability in the Aβ-negatives. It showed the strongest association with cognition, highest AUC against visual reads and best longitudinal consistency between studies. DeepSUVR also increased the effect size for detecting lower Centiloid increase per year in the A4 study. DeepSUVR advances Aβ PET quantification, outperforming standard approaches, which is particularly important for consistent decision making and to detect subtle and early changes in clinical interventions.

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.

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.