Voxel‐wise comparison of [<sup>18</sup>F]MK6240 and [<sup>18</sup>F]Flortaucipir for the diagnosis of individuals across the Alzheimer’s disease spectrum – the HEAD study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In vivo studies using the tau PET tracers have shown high performance for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease dementia and patterns of tracer uptake that resemble those observed in post‐mortem studies. However, tau tracers present distinct patterns of binding that might influence their performance in detecting AD pathology. In a head‐to‐head study, we investigated the performance of [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir for the diagnosis of AD. Method We assessed 132 individuals from the HEAD study (58 CU Aß‐, 15 CU Aß+, 14 MCI Aß‐, 32 MCI Aß+ and 13 AD dementia) with Aß‐PET, [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir. Voxel‐wise receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) of the two tau tracers were used to contrast groups provided the area under the curve (AUC) for disease diagnosis or biomarkers positivity. Result The brain maps showed numerically higher and more spread AUC for [18F]Flortaucipir to discriminate CU Aß‐ from CU Aß+ (Fig.1A). The difference between tracers’ AUC was greater in Braaks IV and V (Fig.2A), both regions that are not expected to have tau accumulation in CU Aß+ individuals, reflecting a potential off‐target binding for [18F]Flortaucipir. To differentiate CU Aß‐ from MCI Aß+ individuals, [18F]MK6240 presented a numerically higher AUC than [18F]Flortaucipir in Braak I and II and similar AUC in other Braak regions (Fig.1B, Fig. 2B). We observed a high performance of [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir in differentiating AD dementia from CU Aß‐ individuals. However, [18F]MK6240 exhibits a higher AUC than [18F]Flortaucipir in all Braak regions, especially Braak V‐VI (Fig.1C, Fig.2C). Finally, [18F]MK6240 presented higher AUC in all Braak regions to discriminate MCI Aß‐ from MCI Aß+ individuals (Fig.1D, Fig.2D). Conclusion Our results indicate that [18F]MK6240 and [18F]Flortaucipir present high accuracy to discriminate AD from CU Aß‐ individuals. However, [18F]MK6240 presents higher AUC to discriminate AD and MCI Aß+ from CU Aß‐ individuals than [18F]Flortaucipir. Together, our head‐to‐head study sheds light on the distinct patterns of binding for Tau‐PET tracers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".