ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022
Automated differential diagnosis of dementia syndromes using FDG PET and machine learning.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metabolic brain networks in dementia with Lewy bodies: from prodromal to manifest disease stages.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2026Article
- PET Imaging in Alzheimer Disease in the Era of Antiamyloid Therapy in the United States: Clinical Utility, Quantification, and Policy Landscape.Journal of nuclear medicine technology · 2026Review
- Clinical translation of fluid, imaging, and digital biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2026Review
- Deep learning for FDG-PET classification in patients with Alzheimer's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies and their mixed pathology: a solution for diagnostic heterogeneity.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- The Evolving Role of FDG-PET in Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia: Current Applications and Future Opportunities.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- An FDG-PET-Based Machine Learning Framework to Support Neurologic Decision-Making in Alzheimer Disease and Related Disorders.Neurology · 2025Article
- IRMA: Machine learning-based harmonization ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- Multimodal radiomics of cerebellar subregions for machine learning-driven Alzheimer's disease diagnosis.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- Frontotemporal dementia subtyping using machine learning, multivariate statistics and neuroimaging.Brain communications · 2025Article
- An artificial intelligence-derived metabolic network predicts psychosis in Alzheimer's disease.Brain communications · 2025Article
- Detecting Alzheimer's Disease Stages and Frontotemporal Dementia in Time Courses of Resting-State fMRI Data Using a Machine Learning Approach.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
- Metal Toxicity and Dementia Including Frontotemporal Dementia: Current State of Knowledge.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Functional Brain Networks to Evaluate Treatment Responses in Parkinson's Disease.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2023Article
- Combined 18F-FDG PET-CT markers in dementia with Lewy bodies.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Metabolic brain imaging with 2-[ Methods: We analyzed FDG PET scans from three dementia cohorts [63 dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD), 79 dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and 23 frontotemporal dementia (FTD)], and 41 normal controls (NCs). Patients' clinical diagnosis at follow-up (25 ± 20 months after scanning) or cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease was considered a gold standard. FDG PET scans were first visually evaluated. Scans were pre-processed, and two sets of features extracted: (1) the expressions of previously identified metabolic brain patterns, and (2) the mean uptake value in 95 regions of interest (ROIs). Two multi-class support vector machine (SVM) classifiers were tested and their diagnostic performance assessed and compared to visual reading. Class-specific regional feature importance was assessed with Shapley Additive Explanations. Results: Pattern- and ROI-based classifier achieved higher overall accuracy than expert readers (78% and 80% respectively, vs. 71%). Both SVM classifiers performed similarly to one another and to expert readers in AD (F1 = 0.74, 0.78, and 0.78) and DLB (F1 = 0.81, 0.81, and 0.78). SVM classifiers outperformed expert readers in FTD (F1 = 0.87, 0.83, and 0.63), but not in NC (F1 = 0.71, 0.75, and 0.92). Visualization of the SVM model showed bilateral temporal cortices and cerebellum to be the most important features for AD; occipital cortices, hippocampi and parahippocampi, amygdala, and middle temporal lobes for DLB; bilateral frontal cortices, middle and anterior cingulum for FTD; and bilateral angular gyri, pons, and vermis for NC. Conclusion: Multi-class SVM classifiers based on the expression of characteristic metabolic brain patterns or ROI glucose uptake, performed better than experts in the differential diagnosis of common dementias using FDG PET scans. Experts performed better in the recognition of normal scans and a combined approach may yield optimal results in the clinical setting.
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.