Plasma p‐tau 181 outperforms FDG‐PET and plasma‐NfL in the diagnosis of biological AD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background To compare the performance of plasma p‐tau181, plasma‐NfL and FDG‐PET in the diagnosis of biological AD. Method We included 787 participants (cognitively unimpaired (CU, n = 251), mild cognitive impairment (MCI, n = 412), and Alzheimer’s dementia (AD, n = 124) from the ADNI database. Participants underwent measures of plasma p‐tau181, plasma‐NfL, CSF P‐tau181, [18F]FDG‐PET, amyloid‐PET and cognitive screening tests. ROC analyses were used to determine diagnostic accuracy of plasma P‐tau181, NfL and [18F]FDG‐PET using clinical diagnosis and core AD biomarkers (amyloid‐PET and CSF P‐tau181) as reference standards. We assessed whether plasma P‐tau181 and [18F]FDG‐PET diagnostic accuracies were significantly different with a bootstrap‐based test (pROC package in R). Second, correlations of [18F]FDG‐PET, plasma‐NfL, plasma P‐tau181 with P‐tau181 CSF, Aβ‐PET, and cognitive performance were evaluated. Correlation coefficients were compared via Cocor package, a statistical framework for comparing associations between intercorrelated measurements. Result Across the total sample we observed that plasma P‐tau181, plasma‐NfL, and [18F]FDG‐PET were able to identify individuals with CSF evidence of AD as well as participants who are amyloid‐PET+. In the MCI group, plasma P‐tau181 outperformed [18F]FDG‐PET and plasma‐NfL in identifying AD pathophysiology measured via CSF P‐tau181 (p = 0.0007), and amyloid‐PET (p = 0.001). We also observed that both plasma P‐tau181, plasma‐NfL and [18F]FDG‐PET were associated with AD pathophysiology measured by core AD biomarkers (CSF and amyloid‐PET). However, [18F]FDG‐PET was more closely associated with cognitive outcomes than plasma P‐tau181 and plasma NfL (MoCA: p < 0.0001; MMSE: p< 0.0001; CDR‐SB: p < 0.0001) Conclusion This study investigated the diagnostic properties of plasma P‐tau181 and two neurodegenerative biomarkers (plasma‐NfL and [18F]FDG‐PET) as well as their to identify biological AD. While plasma P‐tau181, plasma‐NfL concentrations and [18F]FDG‐PET were associated with AD pathophysiology measured by core AD biomarkers (CSF and amyloid‐PET), plasma P‐tau181 outperformed [18F]FDG‐PET and plasma‐NfL in identifying individuals with AD pathophysiology. However, we also observed that [18F]FDG‐PET was more strongly associated with neuropsychological assessments than plasma P‐tau181 and plasma‐NfL. Taken together, our study suggests that plasma P‐tau181 may aid in the evaluation of individuals by identifying those with underlying AD pathophysiology.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".