Cited by 65Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

Accurate risk estimation of β‐amyloid positivity to identify prodromal Alzheimer's disease: Cross‐validation study of practical algorithms

Open access
Palmqvist, Sebastian, Insel, Philip S., Zetterberg, Henrik, Blennow, Kaj, Brix, Britta, Stomrud, Erik, the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, the Swedish BioFINDER study +2 more·2019·Alzheimer's & Dementia

Abstract

Introduction: The aim was to create readily available algorithms that estimate the individual risk of β‐amyloid (Aβ) positivity. Methods: The algorithms were tested in BioFINDER (n = 391, subjective cognitive decline or mild cognitive impairment) and validated in Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (n = 661, subjective cognitive decline or mild cognitive impairment). The examined predictors of Aβ status were demographics; cognitive tests; white matter lesions; apolipoprotein E (APOE); and plasma Aβ 42/Aβ 40, tau, and neurofilament light. Results: Aβ status was accurately estimated in BioFINDER using age, 10‐word delayed recall or Mini–Mental State Examination, and APOE (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve = 0.81 [0.77–0.85] to 0.83 [0.79–0.87]). When validated, the models performed almost identical in Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve = 0.80–0.82) and within different age, subjective cognitive decline, and mild cognitive impairment populations. Plasma Aβ 42/Aβ 40 improved the models slightly. Discussion: The algorithms are implemented on http://amyloidrisk.com where the individual probability of being Aβ positive can be calculated. This is useful in the workup of prodromal Alzheimer's disease and can reduce the number needed to screen in Alzheimer's disease trials.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jalz.2018.08.014

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous research attempted to develop algorithms combining multiple factors and showed better and more robust performance in predicting Aβ positivity of Alzheimer's disease.

    “Previous research attempted to develop algorithms combining multiple factors and showed better and more robust performance in predicting Aβ positivity of Alzheimer’s disease.”
  • Refinements to clinical pretest probability estimates will probably further improve plasma biomarker diagnostic performance and interpretation.

    “Fourth, refinements to the clinical pretest probability estimates (for example, through polygenetic risk scores58 or through basic algorithms incorporating age, APOE genotype and cognitive testing59) will probably further improve plasma biomarker diagnostic performance and interpretation.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palmqvist, S., Insel, P. S., Zetterberg, H., Blennow, K., Brix, B., Stomrud, E., Initiative, T. A. D. N., study, T. S. B., Mattsson, N., & Hansson, O.
Affiliations
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
  • Euroimmun Medizinische Labordiagnostika (Germany) (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Palmqvist, Sebastian
  • Hansson, Oskar
Venue
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-10-23
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
194-204
ISSN
  • 1552-5260 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5279
OpenAlex
W2897862050
Cited by
65
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8
FWCI
6.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Alzheimer s & Dementia (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • H2020 European Research Council
  • Vetenskapsrådet
  • Hjärnfonden
  • National Institutes of Health (U01 AG024904)
  • U.S. Department of Defense (W81XWH-12-2-0012)
  • National Institute on Aging
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
prodromal Alzheimer's disease
MeSH terms
Aged, Algorithms, Alzheimer Disease, Apolipoproteins E, Female, Humans, Male, Predictive Value of Tests, Biomarkers, Amyloid beta-Peptides, Positron-Emission Tomography, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review