ArticleNeurology2024
Boston Criteria v2.0 for Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy Without Hemorrhage: An MRI-Neuropathologic Validation Study.
Article in Neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- CAA or not? When cerebral microbleeds are not enough.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
- A plasma protein signature for cerebral amyloid angiopathy.Acta neuropathologica · 2026Article
- CSF Biomarker Profile of Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy: Diagnostic Performance and Imaging Correlates in a Hospital-Based Neurology Cohort.European journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Drug-Induced Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities: A Neurovascular Perspective on Risk Assessment.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Determinants of cerebral amyloid angiopathy progression: a multicenter retrospective study.Journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers Profiling in Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy and Relationship With Disease Phenotypes.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers in Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy With and Without Spontaneous Lobar Hemorrhage.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Observational
- An explorative analysis of plasma biomarkers associated with cerebral amyloid angiopathy.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Mediation of the Association BetweenNeurology · 2025Article
- Dual-Phase C-11 PiB PET Images for Detecting Tau Pathology in Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2025Article
- Updated imaging markers in cerebral amyloid angiopathy: What radiologists need to know.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Clinical and Neuroradiological Manifestations of Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy: A Closer Look into the Natural History of a Frequent Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Plasma biomarkers distinguish Boston Criteria 2.0 cerebral amyloid angiopathy from healthy controls.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Circulating proteomic biomarkers for cerebral amyloid angiopathy screening and risk stratification.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Differentiating Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy From Alzheimer's Disease Using Dual Amyloid and Tau Positron Emission Tomography.Journal of stroke · 2025Article
- Cognitive Impairment in Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy: A Single-Center Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Spontaneous Non-Aneurysmal Convexity Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Scoping Review of Different Etiologies beyond Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for cerebral amyloid angiopathy with non-hemorrhagic imaging marker.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
- Large-scaleJournal of Alzheimer's disease reportsArticle
- Diagnostic association of ante-mortem biomarkers with cerebral amyloid angiopathy in a cohort with high Alzheimer's disease comorbidity.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesUpdated criteria for the clinical-MRI diagnosis of cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) have recently been proposed. However, their performance in individuals without symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) presentations is less defined. We aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the Boston criteria version 2.0 for CAA diagnosis in a cohort of individuals ranging from cognitively normal to dementia in the community and memory clinic settings.
methodsFifty-four participants from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging or Alzheimer's Disease Research Center were included if they had an antemortem MRI with gradient-recall echo sequences and a brain autopsy with CAA evaluation. Performance of the Boston criteria v2.0 was compared with v1.5 using histopathologically verified CAA as the reference standard.
resultsThe median age at MRI was 75 years (interquartile range 65-80) with 28/54 participants having histopathologically verified CAA (i.e., moderate-to-severe CAA in at least 1 lobar region). The sensitivity and specificity of the Boston criteria v2.0 were 28.6% (95% CI 13.2%-48.7%) and 65.3% (95% CI 44.3%-82.8%) for probable CAA diagnosis (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.47) and 75.0% (55.1-89.3) and 38.5% (20.2-59.4) for any CAA diagnosis (possible + probable; AUC 0.57), respectively. The v2.0 Boston criteria were not superior in performance compared with the prior v1.5 criteria for either CAA diagnostic category. DISCUSSION: The Boston criteria v2.0 have low accuracy in patients who are asymptomatic or only have cognitive symptoms. Additional biomarkers need to be explored to optimize CAA diagnosis in this population.
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.