Cited by 68Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications

A Systematic Review and Aggregated Analysis on the Impact of Amyloid PET Brain Imaging on the Diagnosis, Diagnostic Confidence, and Management of Patients being Evaluated for Alzheimer’s Disease

Open access
Fantoni, Enrico R., Chalkidou, Anastasia, O’ Brien, John T., Farrar, Gill, Hammers, Alexander·2018·Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease

Abstract

Background: Amyloid PET (aPET) imaging could improve patient outcomes in clinical practice, but the extent of impact needs quantification. Objective: To provide an aggregated quantitative analysis of the value added by aPET in cognitively impaired subjects. Methods: Systematic literature searches were performed in Embase and Medline until January 2017. 1,531 cases over 12 studies were included (1,142 cases over seven studies in the primary analysis where aPET was the key biomarker; the remaining cases included as defined groups in the secondary analysis). Data was abstracted by consensus among two observers and assessed for bias. Clinical utility was measured by diagnostic change, diagnostic confidence, and patient management before and after aPET. Three groups were further analyzed: control patients for whom feedback of aPET scan results was delayed; aPET Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC+) cases; and patients undergoing additional FDG/CSF testing. Results: For 1,142 cases with only aPET, 31.3% of diagnoses were revised, whereas 3.2% of diagnoses changed in the delayed aPET control group ( p < 0.0001). Increased diagnostic confidence following aPET was found for 62.1% of 870 patients. Management changes with aPET were found in 72.2% of 740 cases and in 55.5% of 299 cases in the control group ( p < 0.0001). The diagnostic value of aPET in AUC+ patients or when FDG/CSF were additionally available did not substantially differ from the value of aPET alone in the wider population. Conclusions: Amyloid PET contributed to diagnostic revision in almost a third of cases and demonstrated value in increasing diagnostic confidence and refining management plans.

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 · 10.3233/jad-171093

Cites

55 of 55 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?

  • PET imaging has utility for diagnostic decision making, confidence in diagnosis and management planning for patients with cognitive impairment.

    “The PET imaging has utility of diagnostic decision making, confidence in diagnosis and management planning for patients with cognitive impairment [79].”

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: 5

  1. [18]Bloudek LM, Spackman DE, Blankenburg M, Sullivan SD, Pharma H (2014) Review and meta-analysis of biomarkers and diagnostic imaging in Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis 26, 627– 645. 21694448
  2. [20]Ritchie C, Smailagic N, Ec L, Ah N, Ukoumunne O, Martin S (2013) CSF tau and the CSF tau/ABeta ratio for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease dementia and other dementias in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3, CD010803. PMC6464349 28328043
  3. [33]Boccardi M, Altomare D, Ferrari C, Festari C, Guerra UP, Paghera B, Pizzocaro C, Lussignoli G, Geroldi C, Zanetti O, Cotelli MS, Turla M, Borroni B, Rozzini L, Mirabile D, Defanti C, Gennuso M, Prelle A, Gentile S, Morandi A, Vollaro S, Volta GD, Bianchetti A, Conti MZ, Cappuccio M, Carbone P, Bellandi D, Abruzzi L, Bettoni L, Villani D, Raimondi MC, Lanari A, Ciccone A, Facchi E, Fazio I Di, Rozzini R, Boffelli S, Manzoni L, Salvi G Pietro, Cavaliere S, Belotti G, Avanzi S, Pasqualetti P, Muscio C, Padovani A (2016) Assessment of the incremental diagnostic value of Florbetapir F 18 imaging in patients with cognitive impairment: The incremental diagnostic value of amyloid PET with [ 18F]-Florbetapir (INDIA-FBP) Study. JAMA Neurol 256, 184– 192. 27802513
  4. [49]Clifford RJJ, Knopman DS, Jagust WJ, Petersen RC, Weiner MW, Aisen PS, Shaw LM, Vemuri P, Wiste HJ, Weigand SD, Lesnick TG, Pankratz VS, Donohue MC, Trojanowski JQ (2013) Update on hypothetical model of Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers. Lancet Neurol 12, 207– 216. 23332364 PMC3622225
  5. [68]Apostolova LG, Haider J, Goukasian N, LeClair H, Chételat G, Rabinovici GD, Ringman JM, Kremen S, Restrepo L, Mendez M, Silverman D (2017) Critical appraisal of the appropriate use criteria: Effect on diagnosis and patient care. Alzheimers Dement 11, P23. PMC5198877 28054024

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fantoni, E. R., Chalkidou, A., O’ Brien, J. T., Farrar, G., & Hammers, A.
Affiliations
  • GE Healthcare, Life Sciences, Amersham, UK
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, UK
Corresponding author
Fantoni, Enrico R.
Venue
Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease
Published
2018-04-24
Volume
63
Issue
2
Pages
783-796
ISSN
  • 1387-2877 (ISSN-L)
  • 1875-8908
OpenAlex
W2803066492
Cited by
68
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Alzheimer s Disease (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • University of Cambridge
  • Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, King's College London, University of London
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
amyloid PET, Alzheimer's disease
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Amyloid, Brain, Humans, 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