A two-step workflow based on plasma p-tau217 to screen for amyloid β positivity with further confirmatory testing only in uncertain cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cost-effective strategies for identifying amyloid-β (Aβ) positivity in patients with cognitive impairment are urgently needed with recent approvals of anti-Aβ immunotherapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Blood biomarkers can accurately detect AD pathology, but it is unclear whether their incorporation into a full diagnostic workflow can reduce the number of confirmatory cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or positron emission tomography (PET) tests needed while accurately classifying patients. We evaluated a two-step workflow for determining Aβ-PET status in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from two independent memory clinic-based cohorts (n = 348). A blood-based model including plasma tau protein 217 (p-tau217), age and APOE ε4 status was developed in BioFINDER-1 (area under the curve (AUC) = 89.3%) and validated in BioFINDER-2 (AUC = 94.3%). In step 1, the blood-based model was used to stratify the patients into low, intermediate or high risk of Aβ-PET positivity. In step 2, we assumed referral only of intermediate-risk patients to CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 testing, whereas step 1 alone determined Aβ-status for low- and high-risk groups. Depending on whether lenient, moderate or stringent thresholds were used in step 1, the two-step workflow overall accuracy for detecting Aβ-PET status was 88.2%, 90.5% and 92.0%, respectively, while reducing the number of necessary CSF tests by 85.9%, 72.7% and 61.2%, respectively. In secondary analyses, an adapted version of the BioFINDER-1 model led to successful validation of the two-step workflow with a different plasma p-tau217 immunoassay in patients with cognitive impairment from the TRIAD cohort (n = 84). In conclusion, using a plasma p-tau217-based model for risk stratification of patients with MCI can substantially reduce the need for confirmatory testing while accurately classifying patients, offering a cost-effective strategy to detect AD in memory clinic settings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".