Cited by 181Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications

Comparison of amyloid PET measured in Centiloid units with neuropathological findings in Alzheimer’s disease

Open access
Amadoru, Sanka, Doré, Vincent, McLean, Catriona A., Hinton, Fairlie, Shepherd, Claire E., Halliday, Glenda M., Leyton, Cristian E., Yates, Paul A. +4 more·2020·Alzheimer's Research & Therapy

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: The Centiloid scale was developed to standardise the results of beta-amyloid (Aβ) PET. We aimed to determine the Centiloid unit (CL) thresholds for CERAD sparse and moderate-density neuritic plaques, Alzheimer’s disease neuropathologic change (ADNC) score of intermediate or high probability of Alzheimer’s Disease (AD), final clinicopathological diagnosis of AD, and expert visual read of a positive Aβ PET scan. Methods: Aβ PET results in CL for 49 subjects were compared with post-mortem findings, visual read, and final clinicopathological diagnosis. The Youden Index was used to determine the optimal CL thresholds from receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: A threshold of 20.1 CL (21.3 CL when corrected for time to death, AUC 0.97) yielded highest accuracy in detecting moderate or frequent plaque density while < 10 CL was optimal for excluding neuritic plaque. The threshold for ADNC intermediate or high likelihood AD was 49.4 CL (AUC 0.98). Those cases with a final clinicopathological diagnosis of AD yielded a median CL result of 87.7 (IQR ± 42.2) with 94% > 45 CL. Positive visual read agreed highly with results > 26 CL. Conclusions: Centiloid values < 10 accurately reflected the absence of any neuritic plaque and > 20 CL indicated the presence of at least moderate plaque density, but approximately 50 CL or more best confirmed both neuropathological and clinicopathological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease.

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 · 10.1186/s13195-020-00587-5

Cites

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?

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 37 · Cited by 181

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [11]Schonecker S Prix C Raiser T Ackl N Wlasich E Stenglein-Krapf G Amyloid positron-emission-tomography with [18 F]-florbetaben in the diagnostic workup of dementia patients Nervenarzt. 2017 88 156 161 10.1007/s00115-016-0249-z 27913818 · DOI
  2. [33]Mirra SS Heyman A McKeel D Sumi SM Crain BJ Brownlee LM The consortium to establish a registry for Alzheimer's disease (CERAD). Part II. Standardization of the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer's disease Neurology. 1991 41 479 486 10.1212/WNL.41.4.479 2011243 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [35]Rowe CC Villemagne VL Brain amyloid imaging J Nucl Med Technol 2013 41 11 18 10.2967/jnumed.110.076315 23396994 · DOI

Authors
Amadoru, S., Doré, V., McLean, C. A., Hinton, F., Shepherd, C. E., Halliday, G. M., Leyton, C. E., Yates, P. A., Hodges, J. R., Masters, C. L., Villemagne, V. L., & Rowe, C. C.
Affiliations
  • Austin Hospital (AU)
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
  • Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health (AU)
  • Neuroscience Research Australia (AU)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Amadoru, Sanka
Venue
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
Published
2020-03-04
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
22-22
ISSN
1758-9193 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3010723816
Cited by
181
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 1
FWCI
14.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Alzheimer s Research & Therapy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Neuroscience Research Australia
  • FightMND
  • University of New South Wales
  • Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Australian Research Council (CE110001021, 1037746)
  • Victorian Brain Bank
  • Medical Research Council
  • Australian Research Council (CE 110001021, 1037746)
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (630489, 1037746)
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
Alzheimer's disease, amyloid PET, amyloid-beta, neuritic plaques, CERAD, postmortem neuropathology, diagnostic thresholds, clinicopathological diagnosis
MeSH terms
Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Brain, Female, Humans, Male, Amyloid beta-Peptides, Radiopharmaceuticals, Positron-Emission Tomography, Plaque, Amyloid

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