ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2023
Criterion Validation of Tau PET Staging Schemes in Relation to Cognitive Outcomes.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integration over reduction: multimodal PET and fluid biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease and beyond.Current opinion in neurology · 2026Review
- Evaluating practice effects across learning trials - ceiling effects or something more?Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology · 2024Article
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
Abstract
backgroundUtilization of NIA-AA Research Framework requires dichotomization of tau pathology. However, due to the novelty of tau-PET imaging, there is no consensus on methods to categorize scans into "positive" or "negative" (T+ or T-). In response, some tau topographical pathologic staging schemes have been developed.
objectiveThe aim of the current study is to establish criterion validity to support these recently-developed staging schemes.
methodsTau-PET data from 465 participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (aged 55 to 90) were classified as T+ or T- using decision rules for the Temporal-Occipital Classification (TOC), Simplified TOC (STOC), and Lobar Classification (LC) tau pathologic schemes of Schwarz, and Chen staging scheme. Subsequent dichotomization was analyzed in comparison to memory and learning slope performances, and diagnostic accuracy using actuarial diagnostic methods.
resultsTau positivity was associated with worse cognitive performance across all staging schemes. Cognitive measures were nearly all categorized as having "fair" sensitivity at classifying tau status using TOC, STOC, and LC schemes. Results were comparable between Schwarz schemes, though ease of use and better data fit preferred the STOC and LC schemes. While some evidence was supportive for Chen's scheme, validity lagged behind others-likely due to elevated false positive rates.
conclusionsTau-PET staging schemes appear to be valuable for Alzheimer's disease diagnosis, tracking, and screening for clinical trials. Their validation provides support as options for tau pathologic dichotomization, as necessary for use of NIA-AA Research Framework. Future research should consider other staging schemes and validation with other outcome benchmarks.
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.