Implementation and Assessment of Tau Thresholds in Non-Demented Individuals as Predictors of Cognitive Decline in Tau Imaging Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Tau accumulation in Alzheimer's disease is associated with short term clinical progression and faster rates of cognitive decline in individuals with high amyloid-β deposition. Defining an optimal threshold of tau accumulation predictive of cognitive decline remains a challenge. Objective: We tested the ability of regional tau PET sensitivity and specificity thresholds to predict longitudinal cognitive decline. We also tested the predictive performance of thresholds in the proposed new NIA-AA biological staging for Alzheimer's disease where multiple levels of tau positivity are used to stage participants. Methods: 18F-flortaucipir scans from 301 non-demented participants were processed and sampled. Four cognitive measures were assessed longitudinally. Regional standardized uptake value ratios were split into infra- and suprathreshold groups at baseline using previously derived thresholds. Survival analysis, log rank testing, and Generalized Estimation Equations assessed the relationship between the application of regional sensitivity/specificity thresholds and change in cognitive measures as well as tau threshold performance in predicting cognitive decline within the new NIA-AA biological staging. Results: The meta temporal region was best for predicting risk of short-term cognitive decline in suprathreshold, as compared to infrathreshold participants. When applying multiple levels of tau positivity, each subsequent level of tau identified cognitive decline at earlier timepoints. Conclusions: When using 18F-flortaucipir, meta temporal suprathreshold classification was associated with increased risk of cognitive decline, suggesting that abnormal tau deposition in the cortex predicts decline. Likewise, the application of multiple levels of tau clearly predicts the distinctive cognitive trajectories in the new NIA-AA biological staging framework.
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 | 0.015 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".