The Alzheimer's Disease Prediction Of Longitudinal Evolution (TADPOLE) Challenge: Results after 1 Year Follow-up
Open accessAbstract
Accurate prediction of progression in subjects at risk of Alzheimer's disease is crucial for enrolling the right subjects in clinical trials. However, a prospective comparison of state-of-the-art algorithms for predicting disease onset and progression is currently lacking. We present the findings of "The Alzheimer's Disease Prediction Of Longitudinal Evolution" (TADPOLE) Challenge, which compared the performance of 92 algorithms from 33 international teams at predicting the future trajectory of 219 individuals at risk of Alzheimer's disease. Challenge participants were required to make a prediction, for each month of a 5-year future time period, of three key outcomes: clinical diagnosis, Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale Cognitive Subdomain (ADAS-Cog13), and total volume of the ventricles. The methods used by challenge participants included multivariate linear regression, machine learning methods such as support vector machines and deep neural networks, as well as disease progression models. No single submission was best at predicting all three outcomes. For clinical diagnosis and ventricle volume prediction, the best algorithms strongly outperform simple baselines in predictive ability. However, for ADAS-Cog13 no single submitted prediction method was significantly better than random guesswork. Two ensemble methods based on taking the mean and median over all predictions, obtained top scores on almost all tasks. Better than average performance at diagnosis prediction was generally associated with the additional inclusion of features from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). On the other hand, better performance at ventricle volume prediction was associated with inclusion of summary statistics, such as the slope or maxima/minima of patient-specific biomarkers. On a limited, cross-sectional subset of the data emulating clinical trials, performance of the best algorithms at predicting clinical diagnosis decreased only slightly (2 percentage points) compared to the full longitudinal dataset. The submission system remains open via the website https://tadpole.grand-challenge.org, while TADPOLE SHARE (https://tadpole-share.github.io/) collates code for submissions. TADPOLE's unique results suggest that current prediction algorithms provide sufficient accuracy to exploit biomarkers related to clinical diagnosis and ventricle volume, for cohort refinement in clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease. However, results call into question the usage of cognitive test scores for patient selection and as a primary endpoint in clinical trials.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Community benchmarking initiatives like the DREAM Alzheimer's Big Data Challenge and the TADPOLE forecast competition have revealed that many high-performing algorithms do not generalize well to new datasets.
“Community benchmarking initiatives like the DREAM Alzheimer's Big Data Challenge and the TADPOLE forecast competition have underscored the necessity of rigorous external validation, revealing that many high-performing algorithms do not generalize well to new datasets408.”
From Artificial intelligence-driven multi-omics approaches in Alzheimer's disease: Progress, challenges, and future directions (2025) · cites this paper as [408]
Benchmarking efforts, including the DREAM Alzheimer's Big Data Challenge, have revealed that many models perform well on internal data but fail to generalize to unseen datasets.
“Benchmarking efforts, including the DREAM Alzheimer's Big Data Challenge, have revealed that many models perform well on internal data but fail to generalize to unseen datasets, highlighting the necessity of transparent head-to-head comparisons against simple baseline models408.”
From Artificial intelligence-driven multi-omics approaches in Alzheimer's disease: Progress, challenges, and future directions (2025) · cites this paper as [408]
Cites
MissForest—Non-parametric missing value imputation for mixed-type data
Stekhoven, D. J., & Bühlmann, P. (2012) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btr597 · Cited by 6,156 · see citing works
Han, X., Jovicich, J., Salat, D., van der Kouwe, A., Quinn, B., Czanner, S., Busa, E., Pacheco, J., Albert, M., Killiany, R., et al. (2006) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.02.051 · Cited by 1,508 · see citing works
Tractography-based connectomes are dominated by false-positive connections
Maier-Hein, K. H., Neher, P., Houde, J.-C., Côté, M.-A., Garyfallidis, E., Zhong, J., Chamberland, M., Yeh, F.-C., Lin, Y.-C., Ji, Q., et al. (2016) · doi:10.1101/084137 · Cited by 1,361 · see citing works
Beach, T. G., Monsell, S. E., Phillips, L. E., & Kukull, W. (2012) · Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology · doi:10.1097/nen.0b013e31824b211b · Cited by 1,103 · cited 1× · see citing works
“In particular, one study [35] has shown that a clinical diagnosis of probable AD has sensitivity between 70.”
BackgroundPredicting alzheimer’s disease progression using multi-modal deep learning approach
Lee, G., Nho, K., Kang, B., Sohn, K.-A., Kim, D., Initiative, F. A. D. N., Weiner, M. W., Aisen, P., Petersen, R., Jack, C. R., et al. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-37769-z · Cited by 406 · see citing works
Young, J., Modat, M., Cardoso, M. J., Mendelson, A., Cash, D., & Ourselin, S. (2013) · NeuroImage Clinical · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2013.05.004 · Cited by 249 · see citing works
Estimating long‐term multivariate progression from short‐term data
Donohue, M. C., Jacqmin‐Gadda, H., Le Goff, M., Thomas, R. G., Raman, R., Gamst, A. C., Beckett, L. A., Jack, C. R., Weiner, M. W., Dartigues, J., et al. (2014) · Alzheimer's & Dementia · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2013.10.003 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ansart, M., Epelbaum, S., Bassignana, G., Bône, A., Bottani, S., Cattai, T., Couronné, R., Faouzi, J., Koval, I., Louis, M., et al. (2021) · Medical Image Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.media.2020.101848 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Self-citationRen, F., Wei, J., Chen, Q., Hu, M., Yu, L., Mi, J., Zhou, X., Qin, D., Wu, J., & Wu, A. (2025) · Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B · doi:10.1016/j.apsb.2025.07.030 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Self-citationBeyond Medical Imaging - A Review of Multimodal Deep Learning in Radiology
Heiliger, L., Sekuboyina, A., Menze, B., Egger, J., & Kleesiek, J. (2022) · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.19103432 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Parker, C., Weston, P., Zhang, H., Oxtoby, N., & Initiative, T. A. D. N. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.07.12.499784 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Marinescu, R. V., Oxtoby, N. P., Young, A. L., Bron, E. E., Toga, A. W., Weiner, M. W., Barkhof, F., Fox, N. C., Eshaghi, A., Toni, T., Salaterski, M., Lunina, V., Ansart, M., Durrleman, S., Lu, P., Iddi, S., Li, D., Thompson, W. K., Donohue, M. C., Nahon, A., Levy, Y., Halbersberg, D., Cohen, M., Liao, H., Li, T., Yu, K., Zhu, H., Tamez-Peña, J. G., Ismail, A., Wood, T., Bravo, H. C., Nguyen, M., Sun, N., Feng, J., Yeo, B. T. T., Chen, G., Qi, K., Chen, S., Qiu, D., Buciuman, I., Kelner, A., Pop, R., Rimocea, D., Ghazi, M. M., Nielsen, M., Ourselin, S., Sørensen, L., Venkatraghavan, V., Liu, K., Rabe, C., Manser, P., Hill, S. M., Howlett, J., Huang, Z., Kiddle, S., Mukherjee, S., Rouanet, A., Taschler, B., Tom, B. D. M., White, S. R., Faux, N., Sedai, S., de Velasco Oriol, J., Clemente, E. E. V., Estrada, K., Aksman, L., Altmann, A., Stonnington, C. M., Wang, Y., Wu, J., Devadas, V., Fourrier, C., Raket, L. L., Sotiras, A., Erus, G., Doshi, J., Davatzikos, C., Vogel, J., Doyle, A., Tam, A., Diaz-Papkovich, A., Jammeh, E., Koval, I., Moore, P., Lyons, T. J., Gallacher, J., Tohka, J., Ciszek, R., Jedynak, B., Pandya, K., Bilgel, M., Engels, W., Cole, J., Golland, P., Klein, S., Alexander, D. C., The EuroPOND Consortium, & Initiative, T. A. D. N.
- Affiliations
- MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
- University College London (GB)
- King's College London (GB)
- Erasmus MC (NL)
- University of Southern California (US)
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- UK Dementia Research Institute (GB)
- National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB)
- Author not affiliated with any research institution
- Institut du Cerveau (FR)
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
- The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
- The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, USA
- Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Monterrey, Mexico
- University of Maryland, College Park (US)
- University of Maryland, College Park, USA
- National University of Singapore (SG)
- Medical College of Wisconsin (US)
- Emory University (US)
- Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
- Vasile Lucaciu National College, Baia Mare, Romania
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, UK
- Genentech (US)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DE)
- IBM Research - Australia (AU)
- Tecnológico de Monterrey (MX)
- Brandeis University (US)
- Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, UK
- Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US)
- Arizona State University (US)
- Banner Alzheimer’s Institute (US)
- Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle épinière, Paris, France
- H. Lundbeck A/S, Denmark
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Center for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics, University of Pennsylvania
- McGill University (CA)
- University of Plymouth (GB)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- University of Eastern Finland (FI)
- Portland State University (US)
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- ORCID
- Marinescu, Razvan V.
- Oxtoby, Neil P.
- Young, Alexandra L.
- Bron, Esther E.
- Toga, Arthur W.
- Weiner, Michael W.
- Barkhof, Frederik
- Fox, Nick C.
- Eshaghi, Arman
- Ansart, Manon
- Durrleman, Stanley
- Lu, Pascal
- Iddi, Samuel
- Li, Dan
- Thompson, Wesley K.
- Donohue, Michael C.
- Liao, Huiling
- Li, Tengfei
- Yu, Kaixian
- Nguyen, Minh
- Sun, Nanbo
- Feng, Jiashi
- Yeo, B.T. Thomas
- Chen, Gang
- Chen, Shiyang
- Qiu, Deqiang
- Ghazi, Mostafa M.
- Nielsen, Mads
- Sørensen, Lauge
- Venkatraghavan, Vikram
- Liu, Keli
- Manser, Paul
- Howlett, James
- Huang, Zhiyue
- Kiddle, Steven
- Rouanet, Anaïs
- Taschler, Bernd
- Tom, Brian D. M.
- White, Simon R.
- Faux, Noel
- Sedai, Suman
- Estrada, Karol
- Aksman, Leon
- Stonnington, Cynthia M.
- Wang, Yalin
- Wu, Jianfeng
- Sotiras, Aristeidis
- Doshi, Jimit
- Davatzikos, Christos
- Vogel, Jacob
- Doyle, Andrew
- Tam, Angela
- Diaz-Papkovich, Alex
- Jammeh, Emmanuel
- Koval, Igor
- Moore, Paul
- Lyons, Terry J.
- Gallacher, John
- Tohka, Jussi
- Jedynak, Bruno
- Bilgel, Murat
- Golland, Polina
- Klein, Stefan
- Alexander, Daniel C.
- Venue
- Machine Learning for Biomedical Imaging
- Published
- 2021-12-31
- Volume
- 2021
- Issue
- December 2021
- Pages
- 1-60
- ISSN
- 2766-905X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3005163827
- Cited by
- 68
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5
- FWCI
- 8.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- The Journal of Machine Learning for Biomedical Imaging (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- UEF eRepo (University of Eastern Finland) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DZNE Pub (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Apollo (cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1624776, W81XWH-12-2-0012, U01 AG024904)
- U.S. Department of Defense (U01 AG024904, W81XWH, W81XWH-12-2-, W81XWH-12, W81XWH1220012, AG024904)
- Alzheimer's Association (U01 AG024904, W81XWH-12-2-0012)
- Portland State University
- Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (W81XWH-12-2–0012, U01AG024904, AG024904, W81XWH-12-2-, Department of Defense award number W81XWH-12-2-0012)
- European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (115952)
- UK Research and Innovation (MR/S03546X/1, MRC MR/S03546X/1, EP/L016478/1)
- Alzheimer's Society
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (115952, MR/S03546X/1, U01 AG024904)
- European Commission (U01 AG024904, 721820, 115952, 666992, HORIZON2020, W81XWH-12-2-0012)
- National Research Foundation (W81XWH-12-2-0012, U01 AG024904)
- National Research Foundation Singapore
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
- Direktoratet for internasjonalisering og kvalitetsutvikling i høgare utdanning
- Medical Delta
- National Institutes of Health (3u01ag024904-10s2, W81XWH, W81XWH-12-2-0012, AG054409, U01-AG024904, Grant U01 AG024904, AG010483, AG024904, NIBIB NAC P41EB015902)
- Medical Research Council (MR/S03546X/1, U01 AG024904)
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/L016478/1, EP/J020990/01, EP/M020533/1, U01 AG024904, J020990, M006093, M020533)
- National Institute on Aging (U01-AG-024904, W81XWH-12-2–0012, AG 010483, AG 024904, U19AG010483, R01AG054409)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS086905)
- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (P41EB015902, W81XWH-12-2-0012, NAC P41EB015902, U01 AG024904, AG024904)
- EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Medical Imaging (EP/L016478/1)
- 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 › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- Alzheimer's disease, disease progression prediction, clinical trial participant selection, ventricular volume, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, diffusion tensor imaging, ensemble forecasting
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