Universal tau PET scale (Uniτ) – The HEAD Study

Abstract Background The HEAD study aims to collect a large dataset of multiple tau‐PET tracers to provide robust anchor values for tau‐PET harmonization. Here, we tested the hypothesis that anchoring two tau tracer uptake values using head‐to‐head measurements has the potential to generate an accurate universal tau‐PET scale, named Uniτ(tau). Methods We assessed 200 individuals across the aging and AD spectrum (Training: HEAD data freeze 2.0, n=185; Testing: UPitt dataset (Gogola et al.), n=15) with [ 18 F]Flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240 tau‐PET. SUVRs were processed to a common 8mm FWHM, with inferior cerebellar gray matter as the reference region (Pascoal et al.). Uniτ explored two anchoring/harmonization methods. First, we examined within‐tracer anchoring by creating anchor values based on the mean SUVR of Youngs (<25 years) and 95th percentile voxels from cognitively impaired individuals. Second, we explored within‐ plus between‐tracer anchoring, employing linear (e.g., piecewise) and non‐linear regressions. To address the inherent problem of discontinuity of piecewise transformations, we implemented two smoothing methods at the inflection point between equations, transforming them into a continuous function. Results Uniτ scale anchoring within‐tracer resulted in similar estimates for high values, but less accurate in the lower range (Figure 1,2). Anchoring within‐ plus between‐tracer improved estimate consistency, with the piecewise transformation generating the best results. The piecewise smoothing equation yielded estimates comparable to those obtained from the piecewise method without smoothing. This allowed for the use of a single formula. In addition, this leads to more robust results when the goal is to study longitudinal changes in the scale (data not shown). UPitt testing dataset showed similar results to the training set (Figure 3). Conclusion Our preliminary findings suggest that anchoring tau‐PET values both within and between tracers has the potential to harmonize tau‐PET tracers, while preserving their characteristics. Currently, piecewise smoothing is the preferred method for Uniτ, but we are continuously fine‐tuning scale parameters as we acquire more data. The final scale parameters will be determined based on extensive training and testing data from multiple tracers. This cautious methodology holds the promise of delivering reliable, robust, and reproducible results, ensuring safe usage of the scale in clinical trials, and potentially paving the way for future use in clinical practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.089555
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.40
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Universal tau PET scale (Uniτ) – The HEAD Study

Val J. Lowe, Dana Tudorascu, Tharick Ali Pascoal, Guilherme Povala et al.
1 citations
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
0.40
article

Universal tau PET scale (Uniτ) – The HEAD Study

Val J. Lowe, Dana Tudorascu, Tharick Ali Pascoal, Guilherme Povala, Belén Pascual, William E. Klunk, Guilherme Bauer‐Negrini, Pâmela C.L. Ferreira, Bruno Zatt, Bruna Bellaver, William J. Jagust, David N. Soleimani‐Meigooni, Firoza Zubeida Lussier, Brian J. Lopresti, Lívia Amaral, Brian A. Gordon, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Hwamee Oh
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background The HEAD study aims to collect a large dataset of multiple tau‐PET tracers to provide robust anchor values for tau‐PET harmonization. Here, we tested the hypothesis that anchoring two tau tracer uptake values using head‐to‐head measurements has the potential to generate an accurate universal tau‐PET scale, named Uniτ(tau). Methods We assessed 200 individuals across the aging and AD spectrum (Training: HEAD data freeze 2.0, n=185; Testing: UPitt dataset (Gogola et al.), n=15) with [ 18 F]Flortaucipir and [ 18 F]MK‐6240 tau‐PET. SUVRs were processed to a common 8mm FWHM, with inferior cerebellar gray matter as the reference region (Pascoal et al.). Uniτ explored two anchoring/harmonization methods. First, we examined within‐tracer anchoring by creating anchor values based on the mean SUVR of Youngs (<25 years) and 95th percentile voxels from cognitively impaired individuals. Second, we explored within‐ plus between‐tracer anchoring, employing linear (e.g., piecewise) and non‐linear regressions. To address the inherent problem of discontinuity of piecewise transformations, we implemented two smoothing methods at the inflection point between equations, transforming them into a continuous function. Results Uniτ scale anchoring within‐tracer resulted in similar estimates for high values, but less accurate in the lower range (Figure 1,2). Anchoring within‐ plus between‐tracer improved estimate consistency, with the piecewise transformation generating the best results. The piecewise smoothing equation yielded estimates comparable to those obtained from the piecewise method without smoothing. This allowed for the use of a single formula. In addition, this leads to more robust results when the goal is to study longitudinal changes in the scale (data not shown). UPitt testing dataset showed similar results to the training set (Figure 3). Conclusion Our preliminary findings suggest that anchoring tau‐PET values both within and between tracers has the potential to harmonize tau‐PET tracers, while preserving their characteristics. Currently, piecewise smoothing is the preferred method for Uniτ, but we are continuously fine‐tuning scale parameters as we acquire more data. The final scale parameters will be determined based on extensive training and testing data from multiple tracers. This cautious methodology holds the promise of delivering reliable, robust, and reproducible results, ensuring safe usage of the scale in clinical trials, and potentially paving the way for future use in clinical practice.

Alzheimer s & DementiaVol. 20(S2)
Houston Methodist (US), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US), Universidade Federal de Pelotas (BR), University of Pittsburgh (US), University of California, San Francisco (US), Washington University in St. Louis (US), Brown University (US), Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US), McGill University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 31%
Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
0.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.