ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2026
Off-target binding of
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Stage-specific regional distribution of amyloid and tau deposition across the Alzheimer's disease continuum revealed by tau-to-amyloid ratio imaging.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo verify the regional distribution, especially off-target binding, of the tracer 18F-MK-6240, on tau PET images obtained with a high-resolution dedicated brain PET scanner.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the 18F-MK-6240 PET data from subjects with cognitive decline who were enrolled in the BATON study. All scans were acquired using the same high-resolution brain-dedicated PET system. We calculated the standardized uptake value ratios (SUVRs) by using manually defined restricted cerebellar volumes of interest (VOIs) excluding meningeal spill-in, and we compared these SUVRs with those obtained using the conventional CenTauR cerebellar gray matter reference. We also quantified the off-target uptake in regions including the meninges, retina, and ethmoid sinus. Group comparisons and interaction effects were analyzed by t-tests and an ANOVA, and ROC analyses were performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of each method.
resultsOff-target accumulations were clearly observed in the substantia nigra, globus pallidum, and pineal gland. Higher extra-cerebral cortical uptake was observed in the meninges and centrum semiovale in tau-positive individuals, although these differences did not remain significant after a multiple comparison correction. The SUVRs derived with the use of restricted cerebellar VOIs were significantly higher than those from the CenTauR cerebellar VOIs in both the tau-positive and tau-negative groups (p < 0.01). A significant interaction between the diagnostic group and the reference VOI choice was detected (p = 0.019). The ROC analysis showed excellent diagnostic performance, with AUCs of 0.930 for CenTauR and 0.984 for the restricted reference VOIs (a nonsignificant difference).
conclusion18F-MK-6240 PET imaging using a high-resolution brain-dedicated PET scanner revealed notable off-target binding and meningeal spill-in, which significantly affect quantification depending on the reference VOI selection. Optimizing reference regions by excluding extracerebral contamination enhances the reliability of tau PET analyses and may be crucial for longitudinal studies and multicenter trials.
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.