| 1. |
- Mattsson, Niklas, et al.
(författare)
-
Predicting diagnosis and cognition with 18F-AV-1451 tau PET and structural MRI in Alzheimer's disease
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Alzheimer's and Dementia. - : Wiley. - 1552-5260 .- 1552-5279. ; 15:4, s. 570-580
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: The relative importance of structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and tau positron emission tomography (PET) to predict diagnosis and cognition in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is unclear. Methods: We tested 56 cognitively unimpaired controls (including 27 preclinical AD), 32 patients with prodromal AD, and 39 patients with AD dementia. Optimal classifiers were constructed using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator with 18F-AV-1451 (tau) PET and structural MRI data (regional cortical thickness and subcortical volumes). Results: 18F-AV-1451 in the amygdala, entorhinal cortex, parahippocampal gyrus, fusiform, and inferior parietal lobule had 93% diagnostic accuracy for AD (prodromal or dementia). The MRI classifier involved partly the same regions plus the hippocampus, with 83% accuracy, but did not improve upon the tau classifier. 18F-AV-1451 retention and MRI were independently associated with cognition. Discussion: Optimized tau PET classifiers may diagnose AD with high accuracy, but both tau PET and structural brain MRI capture partly unique information relevant for the clinical deterioration in AD.
|
|
| 2. |
- de Wilde, Arno, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessment of the appropriate use criteria for amyloid PET in an unselected memory clinic cohort : The ABIDE project
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Alzheimer's and Dementia. - : Wiley. - 1552-5260.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: The objective of this study was to assess the usefulness of the appropriate use criteria (AUC) for amyloid imaging in an unselected cohort. Methods: We calculated sensitivity and specificity of appropriate use (increased confidence and management change), as defined by Amyloid Imaging Taskforce in the AUC, and other clinical utility outcomes. Furthermore, we compared differences in post–positron emission tomography diagnosis and management change between “AUC-consistent” and “AUC-inconsistent” patients. Results: Almost half (250/507) of patients were AUC-consistent. In both AUC-consistent and AUC-inconsistent patients, post–positron emission tomography diagnosis (28%–21%) and management (32%–17%) change was substantial. The Amyloid Imaging Taskforce's definition of appropriate use occurred in 55/507 (13%) patients, detected by the AUC with a sensitivity of 93%, and a specificity of 56%. Diagnostic changes occurred independently of AUC status (sensitivity: 57%, specificity: 53%). Discussion: The current AUC are not sufficiently able to discriminate between patients who will benefit from amyloid positron emission tomography and those who will not.
|
|
