MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7119483000 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_105999

Tau Spatial Extent Outperforms Tau Load as a Marker of Neocortical Tau Burden: Head‐to‐head evidence from [18F]MK6240 and [18F]FTP PET

2025· article· en· W7119483000 on OpenAlexaff
Arthur Macedo, Nesrine Rahmouni, Firoza Z Lussier, Tissot Cecile, Gleb Bezgin, Joseph Therriault, Stijn Servaes, Brandon J Hall, Tevy Chan, Etienne Aumont, Pamela C.L. Ferreira, Bruna Bellaver, Guilherme Povala, Guilherme Bauer‐Negrini, Lívia Amaral, Belen Pascual, Brian A. Gordon, Val J. Lowe, Hwamee Oh, David Soleimani‐Meigooni, Juan M. Fortea, Suzanne L. Baker, Pedro Rosa‐Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTauopathyVoxelCorrelationPositron emission tomographyMetric (unit)Tau pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The 2024 NIA‐AA criteria propose an Alzheimer's disease (AD) staging system based on medial temporal (MT) and neocortical tau burden. However, the optimal strategy to assess tau burden in these regions, which represent distinct phases of AD pathophysiology, remains unclear. Here, we compared tau load and spatial extent of tauopathy (SEOT) as markers of tau burden in participants scanned with [ 18 F]MK6240 and [ 18 F]FTP. We investigated the relationship between these metrics in MT and neocortical regions‐of‐interest (ROIs) and determined which better correlates with AD severity. Method A total of 257 cognitively unimpaired (CU) and 124 Aβ+ cognitively impaired participants (mean age 68.2 years; 58% female) from the HEAD study underwent tau‐PET imaging with both [ 18 F]MK6240 and [ 18 F]FTP. Tau load was quantified using regional SUVR, and SEOT was calculated as the proportion of abnormal voxels relative to young controls. Both metrics were derived from the MT and neocortical ROIs. Spearman's correlations were computed between SUVR and SEOT within the same tracer and across tracers in the same ROIs. We compared rho coefficients to assess whether one metric showed stronger concordance. Additionally, we compared the correlations of SEOT and SUVR with global cognition, cortical thickness, Aβ‐PET load, and plasma pTau‐217. Statistical comparisons were performed using the R package cocor . Result SUVR and SEOT exhibited non‐linear correlations in both MT and neocortical ROIs for both tracers, with SEOT enhancing the correlation between [ 18 F]MK6240 and [ 18 F]FTP in the neocortex ( p <.0001; Figure 1). Both metrics increased with AD severity, with MT SUVR outperforming SEOT in distinguishing Aβ‐ CU from Aβ+ CU individuals, and neocortical SEOT outperforming SUVR in distinguishing Aβ+ MCI from CU (Figure 2). Neocortical SEOT showed stronger correlations with AD severity markers than SUVR for both tracers. MT SEOT was comparable to SUVR, outperforming SUVR only in correlations with MMSE and Aβ‐PET for [ 18 F]FTP (Figure 3). Conclusion Tau extent improves the association of tau‐PET tracers with AD severity, particularly in the neocortex. These findings suggest that tau extent might be a more suitable surrogate marker of tau burden in neocortical regions, offering valuable insights for in vivo staging of tau pathology and clinical trials targeting late‐stage tau pathology.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.316 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→