Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37300571›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2023

Validation of quantitative assessment of florbetaben PET scans as an adjunct to the visual assessment across 15 software methods.

Aleksandar Jovalekic, Núria Roé-Vellvé, Norman Koglin, Mariana Lagos Quintana, Aaron Nelson, Markus Diemling, Johan Lilja, Juan Pablo Gómez-González, Vincent Doré, Pierrick Bourgeat and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Comparability of Centiloid values from [Neuroimage. Reports · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Comparison of visual and analytic methods of Alzheimer's disease pathologic staging.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article
  17. Considerations in the clinical use of amyloid PET and CSF biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Aleksandar JovalekicLife Molecular Imaging GmbH, Berlin, Germany. a.jovalekic@life-mi.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9997-7409
Núria Roé-VellvéLife Molecular Imaging GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
Norman KoglinLife Molecular Imaging GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
Mariana Lagos QuintanaLife Molecular Imaging GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
Aaron NelsonMIM Software Inc., Cleveland, OH, USA.
Markus DiemlingHermes Medical Solutions, Stockholm, Sweden.
Johan LiljaHermes Medical Solutions, Stockholm, Sweden.
Juan Pablo Gómez-GonzálezQubiotech Health Intelligence, A Coruña, Spain.
Vincent DoréDepartment of Molecular Imaging & Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Australia.
Pierrick BourgeatCSIRO, Brisbane, Australia.
Alex WhittingtonInvicro, London, UK.
Roger GunnInvicro, London, UK.
Andrew W StephensLife Molecular Imaging GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
Santiago BullichLife Molecular Imaging GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
Hermes Medical Solutions (Sweden) · SEInvicro (United Kingdom) · GBAustin Health · AUCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation · AURHAMM Technologies (United States) · USThermo Fisher Scientific (Norway) · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAmyloid positron emission tomography (PET) with [

methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of FBB PET images from 589 subjects. PET scans were quantified with 15 analytical methods using nine software packages (MIMneuro, Hermes BRASS, Neurocloud, Neurology Toolkit, statistical parametric mapping (SPM8), PMOD Neuro, CapAIBL, non-negative matrix factorization (NMF), Amyloid

resultsThe mean sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 96.1 ± 1.6%, 96.9 ± 1.0%, and 96.4 ± 1.1%, respectively, for all quantitative methods tested when compared to histopathology, where available. The mean percentage of agreement between binary quantitative assessment across all 15 methods and visual majority assessment was 92.4 ± 1.5%. Assessments of reliability, correlation analyses, and comparisons across software packages showed excellent performance and consistent results between analytical methods.

conclusionThis study demonstrated that quantitative methods using both CE marked software and other widely available processing tools provided comparable results to visual assessments of FBB PET scans. Software quantification methods, such as centiloid analysis, can complement visual assessment of FBB PET images and could be used in the future for identification of early amyloid deposition, monitoring disease progression and treatment effectiveness.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseAmyloid beta-PeptidesAmyloidAniline CompoundsBrainHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPositron-Emission TomographyReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSoftwareStilbenes4-(N-methylamino)-4'-(2-(2-(2-fluoroethoxy)ethoxy)ethoxy)stilbeneAmyloidAmyloid beta-PeptidesAniline CompoundsStilbenesAlzheimer’s diseaseAmyloid-betaCentiloidFlorbetabenMild cognitive impairmentQuantification

Identifiers

PMID37300571
PMCPMC10542295
OpenAlexW4380077642

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.