Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33638661›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2021

Diagnostic value of amyloid-PET and tau-PET: a head-to-head comparison.

Daniele Altomare, Camilla Caprioglio, Frédéric Assal, Gilles Allali, Aline Mendes, Federica Ribaldi, Kelly Ceyzeriat, Marta Martins, Szymon Tomczyk, Sara Stampacchia and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Amyloid-related Imaging Abnormalities in Alzheimer Disease Treated with Anti-Amyloid-β Therapy.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2023
    Article
  19. Unsupervised [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023
    Article
  20. Plasma biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: a field-test in a memory clinic.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Daniele AltomareLaboratory of Neuroimaging of Aging (LANVIE), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. Daniele.Altomare@unige.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1905-8993
Camilla CaprioglioLaboratory of Neuroimaging of Aging (LANVIE), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Frédéric AssalDivision of Neurology, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Gilles AllaliDivision of Neurology, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Aline MendesDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Rehabilitation and Geriatrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Federica RibaldiLaboratory of Neuroimaging of Aging (LANVIE), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Kelly CeyzeriatLaboratory of Neuroimaging and Innovative Molecular Tracers (NIMTlab), Geneva University Neurocenter and Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Marta MartinsLaboratory of Neuroimaging of Aging (LANVIE), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Szymon TomczykLaboratory of Neuroimaging of Aging (LANVIE), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Sara StampacchiaLaboratory of Neuroimaging and Innovative Molecular Tracers (NIMTlab), Geneva University Neurocenter and Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Alessandra DodichCenter for Mind/Brain Sciences (CIMeC), University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy.
Marina BoccardiLate Translational Dementia Research Group, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Rostock-Greifswald site, Rostock, Germany.
Christian ChicherioMemory Clinic, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Giovanni B FrisoniLaboratory of Neuroimaging of Aging (LANVIE), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Valentina GaribottoDepartment of Molecular and Translational Medicine, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.

Funding

EU-EFPIA Innovative Medicines Initiatives 2 Joint Undertaking (IMI 2 JU) 115952Swiss National Science Foundation 320030_169876Swiss National Science Foundation 320030_185028
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAssess the individual and combined diagnostic value of amyloid-PET and tau-PET in a memory clinic population.

methodsClinical reports of 136 patients were randomly assigned to two diagnostic pathways: AMY-TAU, amyloid-PET is presented before tau-PET; and TAU-AMY, tau-PET is presented before amyloid-PET. Two neurologists independently assessed all reports with a balanced randomized design, and expressed etiological diagnosis and diagnostic confidence (50-100%) three times: (i) at baseline based on the routine diagnostic workup, (ii) after the first exam (amyloid-PET for the AMY-TAU pathway, and tau-PET for the TAU-AMY pathway), and (iii) after the remaining exam. The main outcomes were changes in diagnosis (from AD to non-AD or vice versa) and in diagnostic confidence.

resultsAmyloid-PET and tau-PET, when presented as the first exam, resulted in a change of etiological diagnosis in 28% (p = 0.006) and 28% (p < 0.001) of cases, and diagnostic confidence increased by 18% (p < 0.001) and 19% (p < 0.001) respectively, with no differences between exams (p > 0.05). We observed a stronger impact of a negative amyloid-PET versus a negative tau-PET (p = 0.014). When added as the second exam, amyloid-PET and tau-PET resulted in a further change in etiological diagnosis in 6% (p = 0.077) and 9% (p = 0.149) of cases, and diagnostic confidence increased by 4% (p < 0.001) and 5% (p < 0.001) respectively, with no differences between exams (p > 0.05).

conclusionAmyloid-PET and tau-PET significantly impacted diagnosis and diagnostic confidence in a similar way, although a negative amyloid-PET has a stronger impact on diagnosis than a negative tau-PET. Adding either of the two as second exam further improved diagnostic confidence. TRIAL NUMBER: PB 2016-01346.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseAmyloidosisCognitive DysfunctionAmyloidAmyloid beta-PeptidesHumansPositron-Emission Tomographytau ProteinsAmyloidAmyloid beta-Peptidestau ProteinsAmyloidFlorbetapirFlortaucipirFlutemetamolPETTau

Identifiers

PMID33638661
PMCPMC8175315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.