ArticleAlzheimer's research & therapy2026
Comparative performance of semi-quantitative methods for amyloid deposition in preclinical autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease.
Article in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAutosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease (ADAD) provides a unique window into the earliest stages of β-amyloid (Aβ) pathogenesis. However, it remains unclear whether standard Aβ positron emission tomography (PET) semi-quantitative methods, including the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR), Z-scores, and the Centiloid (CL) scale, which were developed primarily for sporadic Alzheimer's disease (AD), can accurately capture ADAD-specific topographic patterns and Aβ burden in vivo. In this study, we aimed to compare the performance of these Aβ PET semi-quantitative metrics in asymptomatic carriers of ADAD mutations and evaluate their suitability for early detection and staging.
methodsNineteen asymptomatic carriers of ADAD mutations and 21 cognitively normal (CN) controls underwent
resultsBased on visual assessment of tau-PET, 19 carriers were categorized into two groups: 10 into the Tau- group and 9 into the Tau+ group. The Tau+ group showed significantly higher Aβ burden across all cortical and subcortical regions. VA classified 3 participants in Tau- group and all 9 participants in the Tau+ group as Aβ positive. Their corresponding regions with Z-scores > 3 were found in the basal ganglia and early Aβ deposition regions. CLs of participants in Tau- group were all less than 21. VA and regional z-scores (> 3) were highly concordant, with both methods classifying all participants in the Tau+ group as Aβ-positive. Both the > 21 and > 30 CL thresholds classified only 5 of 9 (56%) participants in the Tau+ group as Aβ-positive; the remaining cases, whose focal Aβ deposition primarily localized to the striatum, were classified as Aβ-negative. Quantitative analysis also revealed that in the Tau+ group, Aβ burden in the caudate, putamen, and thalamus reached 100% positivity, whereas early cortical regions such as the angular gyrus and middle temporal cortex showed 75%-80% positivity. The CL scale is weighted toward the cortical regions, underestimating Aβ burden in ADAD, particularly in cases with a striatal-dominant pattern.
conclusionsThe standard CL scale underestimates Aβ burden in ADAD due to limited sensitivity to striatal deposition. Regional Z-scores or striatum-weighted metrics should complement standard CL to improve diagnostic accuracy and trial eligibility assessment.
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.