ArticleAnnals of neurology2022
Optimum Differentiation of Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration from Alzheimer Disease Achieved with Cross-Sectional Tau Positron Emission Tomography.
Article in Annals of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Distinct and shared multimodal neuroimaging patterns in clinical frontotemporal dementia syndromes.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Tau Imaging: Use and Implementation in New Diagnostic and Therapeutic Paradigms for Alzheimer's Disease.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Microscopy assessment of a fluorescence [Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- A review of the flortaucipir literature for positron emission tomography imaging of tau neurofibrillary tangles.Brain communications · 2024Review
- Biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease: role in early and differential diagnosis and recognition of atypical variants.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2023Review
- Article
- Uptake of tau-PET and neuropathological and autoradiographic findings from a globular glial tauopathy case series.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study was undertaken to assess cross-sectional and longitudinal [
methodsOne hundred forty-three participants who had completed at least one flortaucipir PET and had autopsy-confirmed FTLD (n = 52) or high (n = 58) or low ADNC (n = 33) based on Braak neurofibrillary tangle stages 0-IV versus V-VI were included. Flortaucipir standard uptake value ratios (SUVRs) were calculated for 9 regions of interest (ROIs): an FTLD meta-ROI, midbrain, globus pallidum, an AD meta-ROI, entorhinal, inferior temporal, orbitofrontal, precentral, and medial parietal. Linear mixed effects models were used to compare mean baseline SUVRs and annual rate of change in SUVR by group. Sensitivity and specificity to distinguish FTLD from high and low ADNC were calculated.
resultsBaseline uptake in the FTLD meta-ROI, midbrain, and globus pallidus was greater in FTLD than high and low ADNC. No region showed a greater rate of flortaucipir accumulation in FTLD. Baseline uptake in the AD-related regions and orbitofrontal and precentral cortices was greater in high ADNC, and all showed greater rates of accumulation compared to FTLD. Baseline differences were superior to longitudinal rates in differentiating FTLD from high and low ADNC. A simple baseline metric of midbrain/inferior temporal ratio of flortaucipir uptake provided good to excellent differentiation between FTLD and high and low ADNC (sensitivities/specificities = 94%/95% and 71%/70%).
interpretationThere are cross-sectional and longitudinal differences in flortaucipir uptake between FTLD and high and low ADNC. However, optimum differentiation between FTLD and ADNC was achieved with baseline uptake rather than longitudinal rates. ANN NEUROL 2022;92:1016-1029.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.