Alzheimer's disease staging with [<sup>18</sup>F]MK6240 and [<sup>18</sup>F]Flortaucipir ‐ the HEAD study

Abstract Background Utilizing PET amyloid‐beta (Aß) and tau for staging Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) has demonstrated potential in identifying individuals with varying degrees of disease severity, applicable to both clinical trials and practice. However, the diverse binding characteristics of tau tracers pose challenges to the application of this staging across different ligands. In this study, we evaluate a novel staging framework proposed by the AA working group, employing Aß PET and either [18F]MK6240 or [18F]Flortaucipir in individuals participating in a head‐to‐head study of tau PET tracers. This will provide insights into the robustness of this framework when applied across different tau ligands. Method We evaluated 154 people (89 CU and 65 CI), with MK6240, Flortaucipir, Aß‐PET, MRI. SUVRs used inferior cerebellar gray as reference. Participants were categorized in Aß positivity(A), using visual read, and tau positivity (T) in medial temporal lobe(MTL) and neocortex(NEO). Tau MTL(TMTL) and NEO positivity were defined as average +3 SD of youngs. NEO moderate(TMOD) and high(THIGH) was defined as below and above median SUVR of NEO‐positive individuals. Individuals were grouped as: A‐T‐, A+T‐, A+TMTL+(early), A+TMOD+(intermediary), and A+THIGH+(advanced). Results We found that the distribution of the number of individuals across the five AD stages was comparable when using both MK6240 and Flortaucipir tracers (Figure 1). However, upon examining the concordance within each group, we found a low concordance of 30% (3/10) between tracers in the early tau stage (A+TMTL+). Concordance increased in the intermediary stage A+TMOD+, with a rate of 65% (9/14), and further increased to 79% (11/14) in the advanced stage (A+THIGH+). The A+T‐ group exhibited the highest concordance between tracer results, at 95% (21/22). Conclusion Our findings indicate that the application of this framework across different populations using different tau tracers can lead to a compatible distribution among groups. However, in a direct comparison, we noted that this did not necessarily result in high concordance between groups, as group shifts were observed that depended on the cutoffs used (data not shown). These results emphasize the necessity for harmonization of tau PET tracers prior to their utilization for stage determination.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.094006
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Lanthanide and Transition Metal Complexes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.12
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Alzheimer's disease staging with [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir ‐ the HEAD study

Val J. Lowe, Dana Tudorascu, Madeleine Bloomquist, Tharick Ali Pascoal et al.
1 citations
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Lanthanide and Transition Metal Complexes
0.12
article

Alzheimer's disease staging with [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir ‐ the HEAD study

Val J. Lowe, Dana Tudorascu, Madeleine Bloomquist, Tharick Ali Pascoal, Cynthia Felix, Guilherme Povala, Belén Pascual, Carolina Soares, William E. Klunk, Guilherme Bauer‐Negrini, Pâmela C.L. Ferreira, Emma Patrice Ruppert, Matheus Scarpatto Rodrigues, Bruna Bellaver, William J. Jagust, David N. Soleimani‐Meigooni, Sarah Abbas, Suzanne L. Baker, Firoza Zubeida Lussier, Lívia Amaral, Hussein Zalzale, Brian A. Gordon, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Markley S. Oliveira, Eduardo R. Zimmer, Hwamee Oh, Marina Scop Madeiros, Juli Cehula
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Utilizing PET amyloid‐beta (Aß) and tau for staging Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) has demonstrated potential in identifying individuals with varying degrees of disease severity, applicable to both clinical trials and practice. However, the diverse binding characteristics of tau tracers pose challenges to the application of this staging across different ligands. In this study, we evaluate a novel staging framework proposed by the AA working group, employing Aß PET and either [18F]MK6240 or [18F]Flortaucipir in individuals participating in a head‐to‐head study of tau PET tracers. This will provide insights into the robustness of this framework when applied across different tau ligands. Method We evaluated 154 people (89 CU and 65 CI), with MK6240, Flortaucipir, Aß‐PET, MRI. SUVRs used inferior cerebellar gray as reference. Participants were categorized in Aß positivity(A), using visual read, and tau positivity (T) in medial temporal lobe(MTL) and neocortex(NEO). Tau MTL(TMTL) and NEO positivity were defined as average +3 SD of youngs. NEO moderate(TMOD) and high(THIGH) was defined as below and above median SUVR of NEO‐positive individuals. Individuals were grouped as: A‐T‐, A+T‐, A+TMTL+(early), A+TMOD+(intermediary), and A+THIGH+(advanced). Results We found that the distribution of the number of individuals across the five AD stages was comparable when using both MK6240 and Flortaucipir tracers (Figure 1). However, upon examining the concordance within each group, we found a low concordance of 30% (3/10) between tracers in the early tau stage (A+TMTL+). Concordance increased in the intermediary stage A+TMOD+, with a rate of 65% (9/14), and further increased to 79% (11/14) in the advanced stage (A+THIGH+). The A+T‐ group exhibited the highest concordance between tracer results, at 95% (21/22). Conclusion Our findings indicate that the application of this framework across different populations using different tau tracers can lead to a compatible distribution among groups. However, in a direct comparison, we noted that this did not necessarily result in high concordance between groups, as group shifts were observed that depended on the cutoffs used (data not shown). These results emphasize the necessity for harmonization of tau PET tracers prior to their utilization for stage determination.

Alzheimer s & DementiaVol. 20(S9)
Houston Methodist (US), Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (BR), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US), 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), University of California, Berkeley (US)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
Lanthanide and Transition Metal Complexes
0.12
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.