ArticleNeuroradiology2026
Spatiotemporal patterns of amyloid deposition as prognostic markers of Alzheimer's disease.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe study aims to characterize the spatiotemporal distribution of amyloid deposition, differentiate between its subtypes, and explore their predictive value for patient cognitive outcomes.
methodsAmyloid PET data from a prospective consortium study, the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, were used. A spatial independent component analysis revealed regions of amyloid deposition covariation, which served as regions of interest. A subtype and stage inference analysis was then performed to infer spatiotemporal patterns from cross-sectional data. Multinomial logistic regression models evaluated the impacts of demographics and risk factors on subtype assignment and determined the prognostic value of the subtypes for cognitive decline. Longitudinal data were used for validation.
resultsThe study included 1,049 participants (466 cognitively normal, 447 mild cognitive impairment, and 136 Alzheimer's disease; 72 ± 8 years; 543 women), with follow-up data available for 643 (915 ± 431 days from baseline). Three distinct spatiotemporal patterns were identified, primarily affecting the parietal, frontotemporal, and occipital lobes, respectively, in the early stages. The amyloid deposition rates differed between the subtypes, even after age, diagnosis, apolipoprotein E ε4 carriership (APOE), baseline amyloid burden, and tracer types were controlled for (occipital vs. parietal: β = 32.6, P < .001; occipital vs. frontotemporal: β = 17.0, P = .017; parietal vs. frontotemporal: β = 15.6, P = .026). The rates of change in cognitive scores, adjusted for age, diagnosis, APOE, baseline amyloid burden, baseline cognitive score, and tracer types also differed between the subtypes (occipital vs. Stage 0: β = 0.162, P = .021; occipital vs. parietal: β = 0.134, P = .013).
conclusionAmyloid PET subtyping may serve as a valuable independent prognostic biomarker.
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.