Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36872523›Full record

ReviewAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2023

Visual atrophy rating scales and amyloid PET status in an Alzheimer's disease clinical cohort.

Flavia Loreto, Anastassia Gontsarova, Gregory Scott, Neva Patel, Zarni Win, Christopher Carswell, Richard Perry, Paresh Malhotra

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

8 authors.

Flavia LoretoDepartment of Brain Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4729-9727
Anastassia GontsarovaDepartment of Neuroradiology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Gregory ScottDepartment of Brain Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Neva PatelDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Zarni WinDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Christopher CarswellDepartment of Neurology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Richard PerryDepartment of Brain Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Paresh MalhotraDepartment of Brain Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1897-0780

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesVisual rating scales (VRS) are the quantification method closest to the approach used in routine clinical practice to assess brain atrophy. Previous studies have suggested that the medial temporal atrophy (MTA) rating scale is a reliable diagnostic marker for AD, equivalent to volumetric quantification, while others propose a higher diagnostic utility for the Posterior Atrophy (PA) scale in early-onset AD.

methodsHere, we reviewed 14 studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of PA and MTA, we explored the issue of cut-off heterogeneity, and assessed 9 rating scales in a group of patients with biomarker-confirmed diagnosis. A neuroradiologist blinded to all clinical information rated the MR images of 39 amyloid-positive and 38 amyloid-negative patients using 9 validated VRS assessing multiple brain regions. Automated volumetric analyses were performed on a subset of patients (n = 48) and on a group of cognitively normal individuals (n = 28).

resultsNo single VRS could differentiate amyloid-positive from amyloid-negative patients with other neurodegenerative conditions. 44% of amyloid-positive patients were deemed to have age-appropriate levels of MTA. In the amyloid-positive group, 18% had no abnormal MTA or PA scores. These findings were substantially affected by cut-off selection. Amyloid-positive and amyloid-negative patients had comparable hippocampal and parietal volumes, and MTA but not PA scores correlated with the respective volumetric measures.

interpretationConsensus guidelines are needed before VRS can be recommended for use in the diagnostic workup of AD. Our data are suggestive of high intragroup variability and non-superiority of volumetric quantification of atrophy over visual assessment.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseAtrophyBrainHumansMagnetic Resonance Imaging

Identifiers

PMID36872523
PMCPMC10109315

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.