Quantification supports amyloid-PET visual assessment of challenging cases: results from the AMYPAD-DPMS study
Collij, L. E.; Bischof, G. N.; Altomare, D.; Bader, I.; Battle, M.; Vallez Garcia, D.; Lopes Alves, I.; Wolz, R.; Gismondi, R.; Stephens, A.; Walker, Z.; Scheltens, P.; Nordberg, A.; Gispert, J. D.; Drzezga, A.; Perissinotti, A.; Morbelli, S.; Buckley, C.; Garibotto, V.; Frisoni, G. B.; Farrar, G.; Barkhof, F.
Show abstract
Several studies have demonstrated the high agreement between routine clinical visual assessment and quantification, suggesting that quantification approaches could support the assessment of less experienced readers and/or in challenging cases. However, all studies to date have implemented a retrospective case collection and challenging cases were generally underrepresented. MethodsIn this prospective study, we included all participants (N=741) from the AMYPAD Diagnostic and Patient Management Study (DPMS) with available baseline amyloid-PET quantification. Quantification was done with the PET-only AmyPype pipeline, providing global Centiloid (CL) and regional z-scores. Visual assessment was performed by local readers for the entire cohort. From the total cohort, we selected a subsample of 85 cases 1) for which the amyloid status based on the local readers visual assessment and CL classification (cut-off=21) was discordant and/or 2) that were assessed with a low confidence (i.e. [≤]3 on a 5-point scale) by the local reader. In addition, concordant negative (N=8) and positive (N=8) scans across tracers were selected. In this sample, (N=101 cases: ([18F]flutemetamol, N=48; [18F]florbetaben, N=53) the visual assessments and corresponding confidence by 5 certified independent central readers were captured before and after disclosure of the quantification results. ResultsFor the AMYPAD-DPMS whole cohort, the overall assessment of local readers highly agreed with CL status ({kappa}=0.85, 92.3% agreement). This was consistently observed within disease stages (SCD+: {kappa}=0.82/92.3%; MCI: {kappa}=0.80/89.8%; dementia: {kappa}=0.87/94.6%). Across all central reader assessments in the challenging subsample, global CL and regional z-scores quantification were considered supportive of visual read in 70.3% and 49.3% of assessments, respectively. After disclosure of quantitative results, we observed an improvement in concordance between the 5 readers ({kappa}baseline=0.65/65.3%; {kappa}post-disclosure=0.74/73.3%) and a significant increase in reader confidence (Mbaseline=4.0 vs. Mpost-disclosure=4.34, W=101056, p<0.001). ConclusionIn this prospective study enriched for challenging amyloid-PET cases, we demonstrate the value of quantification to support visual assessment. After disclosure, both inter-reader agreement and confidence showed a significant improvement. These results are important considering the arrival of anti-amyloid therapies, which utilized the Centiloid metric for trial inclusion and target-engagement. Moreover, quantification could support determining A{beta} status with high certainty, an important factor for treatment initiation.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Tau-PET and in vivo Braak-staging as a prognostic marker in Alzheimer’s disease 95%
- Head-to-head comparison between plasma p-tau217 and Flortaucipir-PET in amyloid-positive patients with cognitive impairment 94%
- Medial temporal lobe atrophy patterns in early- versus late-onset amnestic Alzheimer's disease 94%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.