Cited by 158Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications

Not quite PIB-positive, not quite PIB-negative: Slight PIB elevations in elderly normal control subjects are biologically relevant

Open access
Mormino, Elizabeth C., Brandel, Michael G., Madison, Cindee M., Rabinovici, Gil D., Marks, Shawn, Baker, Suzanne L., Jagust, William J.·2012·NeuroImage

Abstract

Researchers employing Pittsburgh Compound B positron emission tomography (PIB-PET) imaging have consistently indentified old normal control (oNC) subjects with elevated tracer uptake, suggesting the presence of beta-amyloid deposition in these individuals. However, a consensus regarding the level at which PIB reveals a biologically meaningful signal does not exist (ie. an appropriate cutoff value for PIB positivity remains unclear). In this exploratory study, we sought to investigate the range of PIB distribution volume ratio (DVR) values present in our oNC cohort (N=75, age range=58-97). oNC subjects were classified based on global PIB index values (average DVR across prefrontal, parietal, lateral temporal and cingulate cortices) by employing two approaches: (1) an iterative outlier approach that revealed a cutoff value of 1.16 (IO-cutoff) and (2) an approach using data from a sample of young normal control subjects (N=11, age range=20-30) that yielded a cutoff value of 1.08 (yNC-cutoff). oNC subjects falling above the IO-cutoff had values similar to AD subjects ("PIB+", 15%). Subjects falling between the 2 cutoffs were considered to have ambiguous PIB status ("Ambig", 20%) and the remaining oNC were considered "PIB-" (65%). Additional measures capturing focal DVR magnitude and extent of elevated DVR values were consistent with the classification scheme using PIB index values, and revealed evidence for elevated DVR values in a subset of PIB- oNC subjects. Furthermore, there were a greater proportion of ambiguously elevated values compared to low values, and these elevated values were present in regions known to show amyloid deposition. The analyses presented in this study, in conjunction with recently published pathological data, suggest a biological relevance of slight PIB elevations in aging.

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.neuroimage.2011.07.098

Cites

43 of 43 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?

  • Universal standards for imaging and CSF biomarker measures have not yet been established.

    “These efforts are the subject of ongoing research, but universal standards have not yet been established [201].”

    From NIA‐AA Research Framework: Toward a biological definition of Alzheimer's disease (2018) · cites this paper as [201]

    Section 4.7 of the Discussion (page not provided) says the PIB-PET cutoff is arbitrary, may differ across cohorts, and may not apply to other laboratories. This supports the lack of a universal standard for that imaging measure, but the paper does not establish the same point for CSF biomarker measures or imaging measures generally. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Mintun MA Larossa GN Sheline YI Dence CS Lee SY Mach RH Klunk WE Mathis CA DeKosky ST Morris JC [11C]PIB in a nondemented population: potential antecedent marker of Alzheimer disease. Neurology 2006 67 446 452 16894106

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mormino, E. C., Brandel, M. G., Madison, C. M., Rabinovici, G. D., Marks, S., Baker, S. L., & Jagust, W. J.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Mormino, Elizabeth C.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-01
Volume
59
Issue
2
Pages
1152-1160
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2010021812
Cited by
158
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 7
FWCI
10.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (AG034570, AG032814)
  • Alzheimer's Association (ZEN-08-87090)
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 › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Keywords
Pittsburgh compound B, PiB PET, amyloid-beta deposition, distribution volume ratio, Alzheimer's disease, aging, amyloid imaging
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Alzheimer Disease, Aniline Compounds, Brain, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Thiazoles, Tissue Distribution, Reproducibility of Results, Radiopharmaceuticals, Positron-Emission Tomography, Benzothiazoles, Young Adult

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