ArticleBrain : a journal of neurology2026
Staging Alzheimer's disease through amyloid and tau PET.
Article in Brain : a journal of neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimized plasma p-tau217 and p-tau217/Aβ42 cutoffs enhance detection of pre-clinical Alzheimer's disease across diverse participants.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Observational
- Plasma eMTBR-tau243 and %p-tau217 for Biological Staging of Alzheimer Disease.JAMA neurology · 2026Observational
- The complement system in Alzheimer's disease: evaluating biomarker potential in a complex neuroimmune context.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2026Review
- Continuum of Core 1 biomarkers in preclinical Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2026Article
- Imaging biomarkers in neurodegenerative diseases: advances and challenges.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A workgroup assembled by the Alzheimer's Association recently described a conceptual framework for Alzheimer's disease biological staging based on amyloid and tau PET imaging. However, specific tau PET cut points were left to be determined, a step necessary prior to clinical application. We sought to operationalize and evaluate Alzheimer's disease biological staging by identifying meaningful tau PET cut points to define the four biological stages in a well-characterized participant cohort and describe the features of individuals placed into the different biological stages. The primary analysis included 896 participants in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging or the Mayo Clinic Alzheimer's Disease Research Center longitudinal cohorts. A validation cohort consisted of 328 participants in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Both cognitively normal and impaired individuals with positive amyloid PET and evaluable tau PET imaging were included. Tau PET cut points were identified with Gaussian mixture models to characterize Alzheimer's disease biological stage in study participants with different clinical diagnoses and objective degrees of cognitive impairment as measured by Mini-Mental State Examination. A tau PET cut point in the medial temporal region and two cut points in the temporoparietal region were identified to produce, collectively, the four Alzheimer's disease biological stages described in the revised criteria. Increasing stage was associated with greater likelihood of mild cognitive impairment and dementia diagnosis and worsening cognitive performance on Mini-Mental State Examination and Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes, a result that was reproduced in the independent Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort. This study provided empirical validation for the concept of using amyloid PET and tau PET to separate subjects with biomarker-proven Alzheimer's disease into four biological stages with distinct characteristics.
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.