Large-scale head-to-head comparison of on- and off-target profiles of [18F]Tauvid and [18F]MK6240 tau-PET in aging and Alzheimer’s disease

Abstract Background Tau-PET imaging enables in vivo quantification of neurofibrillary tangles, but tracers such as [ 18 F]Tauvid and [ 18 F]MK6240 present distinct affinities and off-target binding properties. Using the multicenter HEAD research cohort, a large-scale study designed to characterize the aging and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) spectrum, this study directly compares tracer performance to support harmonization across cohorts and clinical trials. Methods 681 participants underwent MRI, amyloid-β (Aβ)-PET, and tau-PET scans with both [ 18 F]Tauvid and [ 18 F]MK6240. We analyzed regions reflecting AD-related tau deposition (on-target) and known age-related or off-target binding. Analyses included paired t-tests, linear regressions, effect sizes and correlation matrices between the two tracers, across on-target and off-target regions. We further assessed tracer signal separation quantifying the noise to dynamic range ratio (NRR), where lower values indicate better assessment of tau. Results Tracers showed strong correlations in on-target regions (R = 0.81–0.95 in the whole cohort; R = 0.83–0.95 in Aβ+; R = 0.59–0.71 in Aβ-), supporting robust tau pathology detection. While off-target regions also correlated (R = 0.58–0.74 in the whole cohort; R = 0.55–0.80 in Aβ+; R = 0.57–0.73 in Aβ-), retention magnitudes differed: [ 18 F]Tauvid presented higher retention in the white matter, basal ganglia and choroid plexus, while [ 18 F]MK6240 had higher retention in the meninges and extracortical region near the entorhinal cortex. Voxelwise paired t-tests and NRR analyses, conducted at both ROI and voxelwise levels, demonstrated that [ 18 F]MK6240 consistently yielded lower NRR values across the cortex, indicating better signal separation, and potentially greater sensitivity for detecting early tau accumulation. Conclusion [ 18 F]Tauvid and [ 18 F]MK6240 capture largely overlapping patterns of tau pathology, but differ notably in the magnitude of off-target binding. These findings highlight the importance of understanding tracer similarities and differences to guide tracer selection and to improve harmonization across studies. Independent and tracer-specific optimizations of pipelines are essential before harmonization across tracers can be achieved, thereby facilitating accurate cross-study comparisons and improving clinical translation. Trial Registration: NCT05361382

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research Square
Published
2026-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9987995/v1
Primary Topic
Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Large-scale head-to-head comparison of on- and off-target profiles of [18F]Tauvid and [18F]MK6240 tau-PET in aging and Alzheimer’s disease

Tharick Ali Pascoal, Guilherme Povala, Hsin-Yeh Tsai, Belén Pascual et al.
4 links
Research Square
Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
preprint

Large-scale head-to-head comparison of on- and off-target profiles of [18F]Tauvid and [18F]MK6240 tau-PET in aging and Alzheimer’s disease

Tharick Ali Pascoal, Guilherme Povala, Hsin-Yeh Tsai, Belén Pascual, Guilherme Bauer‐Negrini, Nesrine Rahmouni, Arthur C. Macedo, Mahnaz Shekari, Bruna Bellaver, Suzanne L. Baker, Firoza Zubeida Lussier, Cécile Tissot, Corrina S. Fonseca, Brian Andrew Gordon, Ji Yeon Lee, William Jagust, Jenna Stevenson, Hwamee Oh, David Soleimani-Meigooni, Pedro Rosa-Neto, HEAD study, Val Lowe, Pâmela C. Lukasewicz Ferreira, Juan Fortea, Joseph Therriault, William Klunk, Renaud LaJoie
preprint en

Abstract

Abstract Background Tau-PET imaging enables in vivo quantification of neurofibrillary tangles, but tracers such as [ 18 F]Tauvid and [ 18 F]MK6240 present distinct affinities and off-target binding properties. Using the multicenter HEAD research cohort, a large-scale study designed to characterize the aging and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) spectrum, this study directly compares tracer performance to support harmonization across cohorts and clinical trials. Methods 681 participants underwent MRI, amyloid-β (Aβ)-PET, and tau-PET scans with both [ 18 F]Tauvid and [ 18 F]MK6240. We analyzed regions reflecting AD-related tau deposition (on-target) and known age-related or off-target binding. Analyses included paired t-tests, linear regressions, effect sizes and correlation matrices between the two tracers, across on-target and off-target regions. We further assessed tracer signal separation quantifying the noise to dynamic range ratio (NRR), where lower values indicate better assessment of tau. Results Tracers showed strong correlations in on-target regions (R = 0.81–0.95 in the whole cohort; R = 0.83–0.95 in Aβ+; R = 0.59–0.71 in Aβ-), supporting robust tau pathology detection. While off-target regions also correlated (R = 0.58–0.74 in the whole cohort; R = 0.55–0.80 in Aβ+; R = 0.57–0.73 in Aβ-), retention magnitudes differed: [ 18 F]Tauvid presented higher retention in the white matter, basal ganglia and choroid plexus, while [ 18 F]MK6240 had higher retention in the meninges and extracortical region near the entorhinal cortex. Voxelwise paired t-tests and NRR analyses, conducted at both ROI and voxelwise levels, demonstrated that [ 18 F]MK6240 consistently yielded lower NRR values across the cortex, indicating better signal separation, and potentially greater sensitivity for detecting early tau accumulation. Conclusion [ 18 F]Tauvid and [ 18 F]MK6240 capture largely overlapping patterns of tau pathology, but differ notably in the magnitude of off-target binding. These findings highlight the importance of understanding tracer similarities and differences to guide tracer selection and to improve harmonization across studies. Independent and tracer-specific optimizations of pipelines are essential before harmonization across tracers can be achieved, thereby facilitating accurate cross-study comparisons and improving clinical translation. Trial Registration: NCT05361382

Research Square
Mayo Clinic (US), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US), University of Pittsburgh (US), University of California, San Francisco (US), Washington University in St. Louis (US), Brown University (US), Institut de Recerca Sant Pau (ES), McGill University Research Centre for Studies in Aging (CA), Houston Methodist Research Institute (US), McGill University (CA), University of California, Berkeley (US)
Good health and well-being
Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
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.

Laika access coming soon