The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Influence of tau PET, amyloid PET, and hippocampal volume on cognition in Alzheimer disease
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the independent and interactive influences of neuroimaging biomarkers on retrospective cognitive decline. METHODS: F-AV-45) amyloid PET scan, and a structural MRI scan were recruited from the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center at Washington University in St. Louis. Cognition was assessed with standard measures reflecting episodic memory, executive functioning, semantic fluency, and processing speed. RESULTS: Results from retrospective longitudinal analyses showed that each biomarker had a univariate association with the global cognitive composite; however, when each marker was analyzed in a single statistical model, only tau was a significant predictor of global cognitive decline. There was an interaction between tau and amyloid such that tau-related cognitive decline was worse in individuals with high amyloid. There was also an interaction with hippocampal volume indicating that individuals with high levels of all 3 pathologies exhibited the greatest declines in cognition. Additional analyses within each cognitive domain indicated that tau had the largest negative influence on tests of episodic memory and executive functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Together, these results suggest that increasing levels of tau most consistently relate to declines in cognition preceding biomarker collection. These findings support models of Alzheimer disease (AD) staging that suggest that elevated β-amyloid alone may be insufficient to produce cognitive change in individuals at risk for AD and support the use of multiple biomarkers to stage AD progression.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“In contrast, cross-sectional and longitudinal human cohort studies of biomarkers support a scenario in which amyloid pathology (Aβ42 lowering in CSF, positive amyloid PET imaging) precedes tau pathology (tau-PET and phospho-Tau elevation in CSF) and then neurodegeneration 126-128 .”
From The amyloid hypothesis in Alzheimer disease: new insights from new therapeutics (2022) · cites this paper as [128]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · Cited by 86,835
The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): Current version and scoring rules
Morris, J. C. (1993) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.43.11.2412-a · Cited by 9,882
Self-citationJack, C. R., Knopman, D. S., Jagust, W. J., Petersen, R. C., Weiner, M. W., Aisen, P. S., Shaw, L. M., Vemuri, P., Wiste, H. J., Weigand, S. D., et al. (2013) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70291-0 · Cited by 4,396
Clinical and biomarker changes in dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease
Bateman, R. J., Xiong, C., Benzinger, T. L. S., Fagan, A. M., Goate, A., Fox, N. C., Marcus, D. S., Cairns, N. J., Xie, X., Blazey, T. M., et al. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1202753 · Cited by 3,814
Self-citationA/T/N: An unbiased descriptive classification scheme for Alzheimer disease biomarkers
Jack, C. R., Bennett, D. A., Blennow, K., Carrillo, M. C., Feldman, H. H., Frisoni, G. B., Hampel, H., Jagust, W. J., Johnson, K. A., Knopman, D. S., et al. (2016) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000002923 · Cited by 1,864
Buckner, R. L., Head, D. M., Parker, J. B., Fotenos, A. F., Marcus, D. S., Morris, J. C., & Snyder, A. Z. (2004) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.06.018 · Cited by 1,325
Self-citationPET Imaging of Tau Deposition in the Aging Human Brain
Schöll, M., Lockhart, S. N., Schonhaut, D. R., O’Neil, J. P., Janabi, M., Ossenkoppele, R., Baker, S. L., Vogel, J. W., Faria, J., Schwimmer, H. D., et al. (2016) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.01.028 · Cited by 1,214
Screening for dementia by memory testing
Grober, E. H., Herman Buschke, L., Crystal, H., Bang, S., & Dresner, R. (1988) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.38.6.900 · Cited by 956
Correction for partial volume effects in PET: principle and validation.
ROUSSET, O. G., Ma, Y., & Evans, A. C. (1998) · PubMed · Cited by 919
Tau and Aβ imaging, CSF measures, and cognition in Alzheimer’s disease
Brier, M. R., Gordon, B., Friedrichsen, K., McCarthy, J., Stern, A., Christensen, J., Owen, C., Aldea, P., Su, Y., Hassenstab, J., et al. (2016) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf2362 · Cited by 734
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Goodglass H, Kaplan E. Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination Booklet, III: Oral Expression: Animal Naming (Fluency in Controlled Association). Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1983.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scheltens, P., De Strooper, B., Kivipelto, M., Holstege, H., Chételat, G., Teunissen, C. E., Cummings, J., & van der Flier, W. M. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)32205-4 · Cited by 5,465
Alzheimer Disease: An Update on Pathobiology and Treatment Strategies
Long, J. M., & Holtzman, D. M. (2019) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.09.001 · Cited by 3,204
Knopman, D. S., Amieva, H., Petersen, R. C., Chételat, G., Holtzman, D. M., Hyman, B. T., Nixon, R. A., & Jones, D. T. (2021) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-021-00269-y · Cited by 2,606
The amyloid hypothesis in Alzheimer disease: new insights from new therapeutics
Karran, E., & De Strooper, B. (2022) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/s41573-022-00391-w · Cited by 742
Amyloid-β-independent regulators of tau pathology in Alzheimer disease
van der Kant, R., Goldstein, L. S. B., & Ossenkoppele, R. (2020) · Nature reviews. Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-019-0240-3 · Cited by 580
Metadata
- Authors
- Aschenbrenner, A. J., Gordon, B. A., Benzinger, T. L. S., Morris, J. C., & Hassenstab, J. J.
- Affiliations
- Washington University in St. Louis (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 2018-08-28
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- e859-e866
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- PMC
- PMC6133625
- OpenAlex
- W2887375324
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 6
- FWCI
- 22.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Neurology (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (P50AG005681, P01AG003991, U01AG032438, P01AG026276, K01AG053474)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
- Keywords
- Alzheimer's disease, tau PET, amyloid PET, hippocampal volume, cognitive decline, neuroimaging biomarkers, episodic memory, executive function, processing speed, semantic fluency
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Amyloid, Cognition Disorders, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Cohort Studies, tau Proteins, Positron-Emission Tomography
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
