Tau PET superior to amyloid PET and MRI as diagnostic tool in dementia: JAMA
The findings of a recent study prognostic study suggest that tau PET is a promising tool for predicting cognitive change that is superior to amyloid PET and MRI and may support the prognostic process in preclinical and prodromal stages of AD. The study results have been published in JAMA Neurology.
Tau positron emission tomography (PET) tracers have proven useful for the differential diagnosis of dementia, but their utility for predicting cognitive change is unclear to date.
So, researchers aimed to examine the prognostic accuracy of baseline fluorine 18 (18F)–flortaucipir and [18F]RO948 (tau) PET in individuals across the Alzheimer disease (AD) clinical spectrum and to perform a head-to-head comparison against established magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and amyloid PET markers.
This prognostic study collected data from 8 cohorts in South Korea, Sweden, and the US from June 1, 2014, to February 28, 2021, with a mean (SD) follow-up of 1.9 (0.8) years. A total of 1431 participants were recruited from memory clinics, clinical trials, or cohort studies; 673 were cognitively unimpaired (CU group; 253 [37.6%] positive for amyloid-β [Aβ]), 443 had mild cognitive impairment (MCI group; 271 [61.2%] positive for Aβ), and 315 had a clinical diagnosis of AD dementia (315 [100%] positive for Aβ). [18F]Flortaucipir PET in the discovery cohort (n = 1135) or [18F]RO948 PET in the replication cohort (n = 296), T1-weighted MRI (n = 1431), and amyloid PET (n = 1329) at baseline and repeated Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) evaluation.
Results highlighted some key facts.
- Among 1431 participants, the mean (SD) age was 71.2 (8.8) years; 751 (52.5%) were male.
- Findings for [18F]flortaucipir PET predicted longitudinal changes in MMSE, and effect sizes were stronger than for AD-signature cortical thickness and amyloid PET across all participants (R2, 0.35 [tau PET] vs 0.24 [MRI] vs 0.17 [amyloid PET]; P < .001, bootstrapped for difference) in the Aβ-positive MCI group (R2, 0.25 [tau PET] vs 0.15 [MRI] vs 0.07 [amyloid PET]; P < .001, bootstrapped for difference) and in the Aβ-positive CU group (R2, 0.16 [tau PET] vs 0.08 [MRI] vs 0.08 [amyloid PET]; P < .001, bootstrapped for difference).
- These findings were replicated in the [18F]RO948 PET cohort. MRI mediated the association between [18F]flortaucipir PET and MMSE in the groups with AD dementia (33.4% [95% CI, 15.5%-60.0%] of the total effect) and Aβ-positive MCI (13.6% [95% CI, 0.0%-28.0%] of the total effect), but not the Aβ-positive CU group (3.7% [95% CI, −17.5% to 39.0%]; P = .71).
- Age (t = −2.28; P = .02), but not sex (t = 0.92; P = .36) or APOE genotype (t = 1.06; P = .29) modified the association between baseline [18F]flortaucipir PET and cognitive change, such that older individuals showed faster cognitive decline at similar tau PET levels.
"In this multicenter prognostic study, the tau PET tracers [18F]flortaucipir and [18F]RO948 demonstrated prognostic utility as strong predictors of cognitive change over time. Tau PET outperformed established MRI and amyloid PET markers in a head-to-head comparison, especially in the Aβ-positive MCI and Aβ-positive CU groups. Our findings suggest that although tau PET as a diagnostic marker is most valuable at the dementia stage of AD,17,18,20 the optimal time window for tau PET as a prognostic marker is during the prodromal and preclinical stages of AD."the team concluded.
For full article follow the link: doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2021.1858
Source: JAMA Neurology
