MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406201307 · doi:10.1002/alz.091694

Clinical use of tau PET in Aβ PET positive individuals: a case series

2024· article· en· W4406201307 on OpenAlexaffabout
Guilherme Povala, Bruna Bellaver, Pâmela C.L. Ferreira, Lívia Amaral, Guilherme Bauer‐Negrini, Firoza Z Lussier, Dana Tudorascu, William J. Jagust, William E. Klunk, Val J. Lowe, David N. Soleimani‐Meigooni, Hwamee Oh, Belén Pascual, Brian A. Gordon, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Suzanne L. Baker, Tharick A. Pascoal

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitive impairmentPositron emission tomographyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentNuclear medicineInternal medicinePsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Identifying individuals’ levels of tau PET pathology could prove to be beneficial in clinical settings, given that emerging therapies aimed reducing Aβ seem to be most effective in these individuals. Here, we present the cases of four patients who visited the memory clinic at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between June and December 2023 and underwent both Aβ and tau‐PET scans. Method These individuals had standard clinical and cognitive outcomes, typical blood tests order in patients with memory impairment, MRI, and, as part of the HEAD study, PET PIB Aβ and two tau PET tracers (MK6240 and Flortaucipir). Result All patients presented a primary complaint of progressive memory decline. The results of their blood count, metabolic panel, TSH, and vitamin B12 tests were unremarkable. Patient 1 had a normal MRI, while Patients 2‐4 exhibited mild ischemic changes (Table 1). All patients tested positive for amyloid PET, supporting the diagnosis of AD. However, their tau PET results varied. Patients 1 (MOCA = 6) and 3 (MOCA =19), who were demented with impaired Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL), tested positive for tau PET with Braak stages V‐VI using both tau PET tracers. Conversely, the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) Patients 2 (MOCA = 19) and 5 (MOCA = 29, neuropsych evaluation indicating MCI), who exhibited low tau levels, tested positive for MK6240 but negative for FTP. Conclusion All four patients exhibited symptoms and signs consistent with typical amnestic AD presentation, which were confirmed using Aβ PET. Aβ PET presented a similar pattern across all individuals (Figure 1). Tau PET demonstrated greater variability, with lower levels in less cognitively impaired patients. Although tau PET can potentially be useful in identifying individuals in the earliest stages that would benefit from Aβ‐lowering therapies, this small series did not exclude that a low MOCA score combined with Aβ PET could achieve a similar outcome. Larger samples in real‐world clinical contexts are necessary to identify individuals with discrepancies between tau PET uptake and cognitive tests. This would reinforce the need for tau PET markers as complementary tests, singularly capable of identifying individuals across various biological stages to indicate therapies in clinical practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments→French-language works237,207→