Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40738658›Full record

ReviewAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2026

Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Detection of Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities: Promise and Pitfalls.

Jeffrey R Petrella, Andy J Liu, Laura A Wang, P Murali Doraiswamy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

4 authors.

Jeffrey R PetrellaFrom the Department of Radiology (J.R.P.), Alzheimer's Imaging Research Lab, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina jeffrey.petrella@duke.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-2596-217X
Andy J LiuDepartment of Neurology (A.J.L.), Memory Disorders Clinic, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Laura A WangNeurocognitive Disorders Program (L.A.W., P.M.D.), Department of Psychiatry, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Institute for Brain Sciences, Durham, North Carolina.ORCID 0009-0000-7164-2148
P Murali DoraiswamyNeurocognitive Disorders Program (L.A.W., P.M.D.), Department of Psychiatry, Duke University School of Medicine and Duke Institute for Brain Sciences, Durham, North Carolina.

Funding

Research Education Component CoreP30AG072958 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Maria Marquine · 2021 to 2026
$24.1M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072958
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advent of anti-amyloid therapies (AATs) for Alzheimer disease (AD) has elevated the importance of MRI surveillance for amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) such as microhemorrhages and siderosis (ARIA-H) and edema (ARIA-E). We report a literature review and early quality-assurance experience with an FDA-cleared decision support artificial intelligence (AI) tool intended for detection of ARIA in MRI clinical workflows. The AI system improved the sensitivity for detection of subtle ARIA-E and ARIA-H lesions but at the cost of a reduction in specificity. We propose a tiered workflow combining protocol harmonization and expert interpretation with an AI overlay review. AI-assisted ARIA detection is a paradigm shift that offers great promise to enhance patient safety as disease-modifying therapies for AD gain broader clinical use; however, some pitfalls need to be considered.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseArtificial IntelligenceImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingHumansReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID40738658
PMCPMC12867066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.