Defining imaging biomarker cut points for brain aging and Alzheimer's disease

Clifford R Jr. Jack, Heather J. Wiste, Stephen D. Weigand, Terry M Therneau, Val Lowe, David S Knopman, Jeffrey L. Gunter, Matthew L. Senjem, David T Jones, Kejal M Kantarci, Mary Margaret Machulda, Michelle M Mielke, Rosebud O Roberts, Prashanthi D Vemuri, Denise A. Reyes, Ronald Carl Petersen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

108 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Our goal was to develop cut points for amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), tau PET, flouro-deoxyglucose (FDG) PET, and MRI cortical thickness. Methods: We examined five methods for determining cut points. Results: The reliable worsening method produced a cut point only for amyloid PET. The specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of cognitively impaired versus young clinically normal (CN) methods labeled the most people abnormal and all gave similar cut points for tau PET, FDG PET, and cortical thickness. Cut points defined using the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus age-matched CN method labeled fewer people abnormal. Discussion: In the future, we will use a single cut point for amyloid PET (standardized uptake value ratio, 1.42; centiloid, 19) based on the reliable worsening cut point method. We will base lenient cut points for tau PET, FDG PET, and cortical thickness on the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus young CN method and base conservative cut points on the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus age-matched CN method.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAlzheimer's and Dementia
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2016

Fingerprint

Brain Diseases
Positron-Emission Tomography
Alzheimer Disease
Biomarkers
Deoxyglucose
Amyloid
Sensitivity and Specificity

Keywords

  • Alzheimer's biomarkers
  • Alzheimer's disease
  • Alzheimer's imaging
  • Alzheimer's MRI
  • Amyloid PET
  • FDG PET
  • Quantitative imaging
  • Tau PET

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology
  • Health Policy
  • Developmental Neuroscience
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

@article{2e347cbb115e4379b945b55ed515884f,
title = "Defining imaging biomarker cut points for brain aging and Alzheimer's disease",
abstract = "Introduction: Our goal was to develop cut points for amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), tau PET, flouro-deoxyglucose (FDG) PET, and MRI cortical thickness. Methods: We examined five methods for determining cut points. Results: The reliable worsening method produced a cut point only for amyloid PET. The specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of cognitively impaired versus young clinically normal (CN) methods labeled the most people abnormal and all gave similar cut points for tau PET, FDG PET, and cortical thickness. Cut points defined using the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus age-matched CN method labeled fewer people abnormal. Discussion: In the future, we will use a single cut point for amyloid PET (standardized uptake value ratio, 1.42; centiloid, 19) based on the reliable worsening cut point method. We will base lenient cut points for tau PET, FDG PET, and cortical thickness on the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus young CN method and base conservative cut points on the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus age-matched CN method.",
keywords = "Alzheimer's biomarkers, Alzheimer's disease, Alzheimer's imaging, Alzheimer's MRI, Amyloid PET, FDG PET, Quantitative imaging, Tau PET",
author = "Jack, {Clifford R Jr.} and Wiste, {Heather J.} and Weigand, {Stephen D.} and Therneau, {Terry M} and Val Lowe and Knopman, {David S} and Gunter, {Jeffrey L.} and Senjem, {Matthew L.} and Jones, {David T} and Kantarci, {Kejal M} and Machulda, {Mary Margaret} and Mielke, {Michelle M} and Roberts, {Rosebud O} and Vemuri, {Prashanthi D} and Reyes, {Denise A.} and Petersen, {Ronald Carl}",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1016/j.jalz.2016.08.005",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Alzheimer's and Dementia",
issn = "1552-5260",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining imaging biomarker cut points for brain aging and Alzheimer's disease

AU - Jack, Clifford R Jr.

AU - Wiste, Heather J.

AU - Weigand, Stephen D.

AU - Therneau, Terry M

AU - Lowe, Val

AU - Knopman, David S

AU - Gunter, Jeffrey L.

AU - Senjem, Matthew L.

AU - Jones, David T

AU - Kantarci, Kejal M

AU - Machulda, Mary Margaret

AU - Mielke, Michelle M

AU - Roberts, Rosebud O

AU - Vemuri, Prashanthi D

AU - Reyes, Denise A.

AU - Petersen, Ronald Carl

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Introduction: Our goal was to develop cut points for amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), tau PET, flouro-deoxyglucose (FDG) PET, and MRI cortical thickness. Methods: We examined five methods for determining cut points. Results: The reliable worsening method produced a cut point only for amyloid PET. The specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of cognitively impaired versus young clinically normal (CN) methods labeled the most people abnormal and all gave similar cut points for tau PET, FDG PET, and cortical thickness. Cut points defined using the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus age-matched CN method labeled fewer people abnormal. Discussion: In the future, we will use a single cut point for amyloid PET (standardized uptake value ratio, 1.42; centiloid, 19) based on the reliable worsening cut point method. We will base lenient cut points for tau PET, FDG PET, and cortical thickness on the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus young CN method and base conservative cut points on the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus age-matched CN method.

AB - Introduction: Our goal was to develop cut points for amyloid positron emission tomography (PET), tau PET, flouro-deoxyglucose (FDG) PET, and MRI cortical thickness. Methods: We examined five methods for determining cut points. Results: The reliable worsening method produced a cut point only for amyloid PET. The specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy of cognitively impaired versus young clinically normal (CN) methods labeled the most people abnormal and all gave similar cut points for tau PET, FDG PET, and cortical thickness. Cut points defined using the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus age-matched CN method labeled fewer people abnormal. Discussion: In the future, we will use a single cut point for amyloid PET (standardized uptake value ratio, 1.42; centiloid, 19) based on the reliable worsening cut point method. We will base lenient cut points for tau PET, FDG PET, and cortical thickness on the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus young CN method and base conservative cut points on the accuracy of cognitively impaired versus age-matched CN method.

KW - Alzheimer's biomarkers

KW - Alzheimer's disease

KW - Alzheimer's imaging

KW - Alzheimer's MRI

KW - Amyloid PET

KW - FDG PET

KW - Quantitative imaging

KW - Tau PET

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85006038127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85006038127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jalz.2016.08.005

DO - 10.1016/j.jalz.2016.08.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 27697430

AN - SCOPUS:85006038127

JO - Alzheimer's and Dementia

JF - Alzheimer's and Dementia

SN - 1552-5260

ER -