MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406222424 · doi:10.1002/alz.093894

Comparison of [<sup>18</sup>F]MK6240 and [<sup>18</sup>F]Flortaucipir standardized uptake values (SUVs): the HEAD study

2024· article· en· W4406222424 on OpenAlexaff
Cécile Tissot, Dana Tudorascu, Firoza Z Lussier, Nesrine Rahmouni, Stijn Servaes, Joseph Therriault, Jenna Stevenson, Brian A. Gordon, Belén Pascual, Val J. Lowe, David N. Soleimani‐Meigooni, Hwamee Oh, William E. Klunk, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, William J. Jagust, Tharick A. Pascoal, Suzanne L. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead (geology)Nuclear medicineRadiochemistryMedicineChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Differences between on‐ and off‐target retention characteristics between [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir (FTP) complicate the harmonization across tracers. Our objective here was to separate the impact of the reference region by evaluating correlations between [18F]MK6240 (MK) and [18F]FTP standard uptake values (SUVs). Method Participants (Figure 1, n=90) received an amyloid‐β (Aβ) PET scan ([11C]PIB or [18F]NAV4694) and two tau‐PET scans: [18F]MK (90‐110 minutes post‐injection) and [18F]FTP (80‐100 minutes post‐injection). For all PET scans, the individual frames were realigned, averaged, and co‐registered to a Freesurfer 7.1‐segmented T1‐MPRAGE. SUVs were calculated in the reference region (inferior cerebellar gray), on‐target regions (entorhinal cortex, hippocampus, Braak III, Braak IV, Braak V, Braak VI) and off‐target regions (caudate, pallidum, putamen, thalamus, cerebellar white matter, choroid plexus, meninges, eroded white matter). We examined correlations between [18F]MK and [18F]FTP SUV values as a function of Aβ status, as well as their associations with age. Result All correlations (Figure 2) were significant at p<0.001. The interaction with Aβ status was significant for hippocampus, BraakIII‐V and the metatemporal region. In Aβ+ participants, [18F]FTP and [18F]MK6240 have similar SUVs in on‐target regions with a slope close to 1 except for in hippocampus and Braak VI. However, [18F]FTP SUVs, on average, were greater than [18F]MK SUVs in Aβ+ and Aβ‐ subjects in the reference region and all off‐target regions except for meninges, and in Aβ‐ subjects in the on‐target regions. Age correlated with [18F]FTP SUVs in Aβ‐ subjects in all regions (except the reference region, Braak VI and meninges) and [18F]MK SUVs in putamen and pallidum, but this correlation was only significant (p<0.01) when young and old subjects were included. Conclusion Despite [18F]MK’s higher affinity for tau and SUVR dynamic range being twice that of [18F]FTP, the SUVs in on‐target regions are similar. The higher [18F]FTP signal in the reference region appears to be the contributing factor to the lower dynamic range. The higher [18F]FTP signal in on‐target regions for Aβ‐ subjects may reflect the presence of off‐target signals in these subjects. Taking off‐target signals into account should improve correlations between the two tracers, especially when measuring the earliest deposition of tau.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→