Show simple item record

Performance of [18F]flutemetamol amyloid imaging against the neuritic plaque component of CERAD and the current (2012) NIA‐AA recommendations for the neuropathologic diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease

dc.contributor.authorSalloway, Stephen
dc.contributor.authorGamez, Jose E.
dc.contributor.authorSingh, Upinder
dc.contributor.authorSadowsky, Carl H.
dc.contributor.authorVillena, Teresa
dc.contributor.authorSabbagh, Marwan N.
dc.contributor.authorBeach, Thomas G.
dc.contributor.authorDuara, Ranjan
dc.contributor.authorFleisher, Adam S.
dc.contributor.authorFrey, Kirk A.
dc.contributor.authorWalker, Zuzana
dc.contributor.authorHunjan, Arvinder
dc.contributor.authorEscovar, Yavir M.
dc.contributor.authorAgronin, Marc E.
dc.contributor.authorRoss, Joel
dc.contributor.authorBozoki, Andrea
dc.contributor.authorAkinola, Mary
dc.contributor.authorShi, Jiong
dc.contributor.authorVandenberghe, Rik
dc.contributor.authorIkonomovic, Milos D.
dc.contributor.authorSherwin, Paul F.
dc.contributor.authorFarrar, Gill
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Adrian P.L.
dc.contributor.authorBuckley, Christopher J.
dc.contributor.authorThal, Dietmar Rudolf
dc.contributor.authorZanette, Michelle
dc.contributor.authorCurtis, Craig
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-13T15:08:49Z
dc.date.available2020-01-13T15:08:49Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationSalloway, Stephen; Gamez, Jose E.; Singh, Upinder; Sadowsky, Carl H.; Villena, Teresa; Sabbagh, Marwan N.; Beach, Thomas G.; Duara, Ranjan; Fleisher, Adam S.; Frey, Kirk A.; Walker, Zuzana; Hunjan, Arvinder; Escovar, Yavir M.; Agronin, Marc E.; Ross, Joel; Bozoki, Andrea; Akinola, Mary; Shi, Jiong; Vandenberghe, Rik; Ikonomovic, Milos D.; Sherwin, Paul F.; Farrar, Gill; Smith, Adrian P.L.; Buckley, Christopher J.; Thal, Dietmar Rudolf; Zanette, Michelle; Curtis, Craig (2017). "Performance of [18F]flutemetamol amyloid imaging against the neuritic plaque component of CERAD and the current (2012) NIA‐AA recommendations for the neuropathologic diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease." Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring 9(C): 25-34.
dc.identifier.issn2352-8729
dc.identifier.issn2352-8729
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/152734
dc.description.abstractIntroductionPerformance of the amyloid tracer [18F]flutemetamol was evaluated against three pathology standard of truth (SoT) measures including neuritic plaques (CERAD “original” and “modified” and the amyloid component of the 2012 NIA‐AA guidelines).MethodsAfter [18F]flutemetamol imaging, 106 end‐of‐life patients who died underwent postmortem brain examination for amyloid plaque load. Blinded positron emission tomography scan interpretations by five independent electronically trained readers were compared with pathology measures.ResultsBy SoT, sensitivity and specificity of majority image interpretations were, respectively, 91.9% and 87.5% with “original CERAD,” 90.8% and 90.0% with “modified CERAD,” and 85.7% and 100% with the 2012 NIA‐AA criteria.DiscussionThe high accuracy of either CERAD criteria suggests that [18F]flutemetamol predominantly reflects neuritic amyloid plaque density. However, the use of CERAD criteria as the SoT can result in some false‐positive results because of the presence of diffuse plaques, which are accounted for when the positron emission tomography read is compared with the 2012 NIA‐AA criteria.HighlightsDetermination of the accuracy of [18F]flutemetamol image read against Aβ at autopsy.High sensitivity and specificity to 3 neuropathologic criteria as Standards of Truth.Images are 100% specific when the SoT reflects both neuritic and diffuse plaques.This study has the largest autopsy validation cohort for Aβ PET tracers to date.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.publisherW.B. Saunders Company
dc.subject.otherSensitivity
dc.subject.otherSpecificity
dc.subject.otherAlzheimer’s disease
dc.subject.otherAmyloid PET
dc.subject.otherAutopsy
dc.subject.other[18F]Flutemetamol
dc.subject.otherThal phasing
dc.subject.otherDiagnostic
dc.titlePerformance of [18F]flutemetamol amyloid imaging against the neuritic plaque component of CERAD and the current (2012) NIA‐AA recommendations for the neuropathologic diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNeurology and Neurosciences
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/152734/1/dad2jdadm201706001.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.dadm.2017.06.001
dc.identifier.sourceAlzheimer’s & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring
dc.identifier.citedreferenceR. Cotran, V. Kumar, S. Robbins. Robbins Pathologic Basis of Disease. 6th ed.. 1999; W.B. Saunders Company: Philadelphia
dc.identifier.citedreferenceM.D. Ikonomovic, C. Buckley, K. Heurling, P.F. Sherwin, P.A. Jones, M. Zanette, et al. Post‐mortem histopathology underlying β‐amyloid PET imaging following flutemetamol F 18 injection. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 4: 2016; 130 – 154
dc.identifier.citedreferenceC.M. Clark, J.A. Schneider, B.J. Bedell, T.G. Beach, W.B. Bilker, M.A. Mintun, et al. Use of florbetapir‐PET for imaging beta‐amyloid pathology. JAMA. 305: 2011; 275 – 283
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJ.H. Cooper. An evaluation of current methods for the diagnostic histochemistry of amyloid. J Clin Pathol. 22: 1969; 410 – 413
dc.identifier.citedreferenceP.G. Vallet, R. Guntern, P.R. Hof, J. Golaz, A. Delacourte, N.K. Robakis, et al. A comparative study of histological and immunohistochemical methods for neurofibrillary tangles and senile plaques in Alzheimer’s disease. Acta Neuropathol. 83: 1992; 170 – 178
dc.identifier.citedreferenceP. Vemuri, J.L. Whitwell, K. Kantarci, A. Keith, J.E. Parisi, M.S. Shiung, et al. Antemortem MRI based STructural Abnormality iNDex (STAND)‐scores correlate with postmortem Braak neurofibrillary tangle stage. Neuroimage. 42: 2011; 559 – 567
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJ.L. Price, D.W. McKeel, V.D. Buckles, C.M. Roe, C. Xiong, M. Grundman, et al. Neuropathology of nondemented aging: presumptive evidence for preclinical Alzheimer disease. Neurobiol Aging. 30: 2009; 1026 – 1036
dc.identifier.citedreferenceT. Miki, H. Shimada, J.S. Kim, Y. Yamamoto, M. Sugino, H. Kowa, et al. Brain uptake and safety of Flutemetamol F 18 injection in Japanese subjects with probable Alzheimer’s disease, subjects with amnestic mild cognitive impairment and healthy volunteers. Ann Nucl Med. 31: 2017; 260 – 272
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJ.M. Mountz, C.M. Laymon, A.D. Cohen, Z. Zhang, J.C. Price, S. Boudhar, et al. Comparison of qualitative and quantitative imaging characteristics of [11C]PiB and [18F]flutemetamol in normal control and Alzheimer’s subjects. Neuroimage Clin. 9: 2015; 592 – 598
dc.identifier.citedreferenceV.L. Villemagne, S. Burnham, P. Bourgeat, B. Brown, K.A. Ellis, O. Salvado, et al. Amyloid‐beta deposition, neurodegeneration, and cognitive decline in sporadic Alzheimer’s disease: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol. 12: 2013; 357 – 367
dc.identifier.citedreferenceM. Bertoux, C. O’Callaghan, E. Flanagan, J.R. Hodges, M. Hornberger. Fronto‐striatal atrophy in behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Front Neurol. 6: 2015; 147
dc.identifier.citedreferenceT.G. Beach, D.R. Thal, M. Zanette, A. Smith, C. Buckley. Detection of striatal amyloid plaques with [18F]flutemetamol: validation with postmortem histopathology. J Alzheimers Dis. 52: 2016; 863 – 873
dc.identifier.citedreferenceM.E. Murray, V.J. Lowe, N.R. Graff‐Radford, A.M. Liesinger, A. Cannon, S.A. Przybelski, et al. Clinicopathologic and 11, C‐Pittsburgh compound B implications of Thal amyloid phase across the Alzheimer’s disease spectrum. Brain. 138: 2015; 1370 – 1381
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIkonomovic MD, Abrahamson EE, Buckley CJ, Mathis CA, Klunk WE, Farrar G. Contribution of neuritic and diffuse plaques to signal derived from CN‐Flutemetamol: a preliminary study in AD autopsy brains. Human Amyloid Imaging 2017 Meeting Abstract 2017:150.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceL. Thurfjell, J. Lilja, R. Lundqvist, C. Buckley, A. Smith, R. Vandenberghe, et al. Automated quantification of 18F‐flutemetamol PET activity for categorizing scans as negative or positive for brain amyloid: concordance with visual image reads. J Nucl Med. 55: 2014; 1623 – 1628
dc.identifier.citedreferenceV. Leinonen, J.O. Rinne, K.A. Virtanen, O. Eskola, J. Rummukainen, J. Huttunen, et al. Positron emission tomography with [18F]flutemetamol and [11C]PiB for in vivo detection of cerebral cortical amyloid in normal pressure hydrocephalus patients. Eur J Neurol. 20: 2013; 1043 – 1052
dc.identifier.citedreferenceR. Lundqvist, J. Lilja, B.A. Thomas, J. Lötjönen, V.L. Villemagne, C.C. Rowe, et al. Implementation and validation of an adaptive template registration method for 18F‐flutemetamol imaging data. J Nucl Med. 54: 2013; 1472 – 1478
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJ. Seibyl, A.M. Catafau, H. Barthel, K. Ishii, C.C. Rowe, J.B. Leverenz, et al. Impact of training method on the robustness of the visual assessment of 18F‐florbetaben PET scans: results from a Phase 3 trial. J Nucl Med. 57: 2016; 900 – 906
dc.identifier.citedreferenceC.J. Buckley, P.F. Sherwin, A.P.L. Smith, J. Wolber, S.M. Weick, D.J. Brooks. Validation of an electronic image reader training programme for interpretation of [18F]flutemetamol β‐amyloid PET brain images. Nucl Med Commun. 38: 2017; 234 – 241
dc.identifier.citedreferenceS. Mirra, A. Heyman, D. McKeel, S. Sumi. The consortium to establish a registry for Alzheimer’s disease (CERAD). Part II. standardization of the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology. 46: 1991; 142 – 145
dc.identifier.citedreferenceD.R. Thal, U. Rüb, M. Orantes, H. Braak. Phases of A beta‐deposition in the human brain and its relevance for the development of AD. Neurology. 58: 2002; 1791 – 1800
dc.identifier.citedreferenceD.R. Thal, T.G. Beach, M. Zanette, K. Heurling, A. Chakrabarty, A. Ismail, et al. [18F]flutemetamol amyloid positron emission tomography in preclinical and symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease: specific detection of advanced phases of amyloid‐β pathology. Alzheimers Dement. 11: 2015; 975 – 985
dc.identifier.citedreferenceB.T. Hyman, C.H. Phelps, T.G. Beach, E.H. Bigio, N.J. Cairns, M.C. Carrillo, et al. National Insitute on Aging‐Alzheimer’s Association guidelines for the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 8: 2012; 1 – 13
dc.identifier.citedreferenceA. Snellman, J. Rokka, F.R. López‐Picón, O. Eskola, M. Salmona, G. Forloni, et al. In vivo PET imaging of beta‐amyloid deposition in mouse models of Alzheimer’s disease with a high specific activity PET imaging agent [18F]flutemetamol. EJNMMI Res. 4: 2014; 37
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO. Sabri, J. Seibyl, C. Rowe, H. Barthel. Beta‐amyloid imaging with florbetaben. Clin Transl Imaging. 3: 2015; 13 – 26
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEMA. Vizamyl EU Summary of Product characteristics 2017 n.d. Available at: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_‐_Product_Information/human/002557/WC500172950.pdf. Accessed March 20, 2017.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFDA. US Prescribing information for Vizamyl 2017 n.d. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/203137s008lbl.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2017.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFDA. US Prescribing information for Amyvid 2013 n.d. Available at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2013/202008s020lbl.pdf. Accessed March 20, 2017.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEMA. Neuraceq EU Summary of Product characteristics 2016 n.d. Available at: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_‐_Product_Information/human/002553/WC500162592.pdf. Accessed March 20, 2017.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFDA. US Prescribing information for Neuraceq 2016 n.d. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2016/204677s012lbl.pdf. Accessed March 20, 2017.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceM.D. Ikonomovic, W.E. Klunk, E.E. Abrahamson, C.A. Mathis, J.C. Price, N.D. Tsopelas, et al. Post‐mortem correlates of in vivo PiB‐PET amyloid imaging in a typical case of Alzheimer’s disease. Brain. 131: 2008; 1630 – 1645
dc.identifier.citedreferenceC. Curtis, J.E. Gamez, U. Singh, C.H. Sadowsky, T. Villena, M.N. Sabbagh, et al. Phase 3 trial of flutemetamol labeled with radioactive fluorine 18 imaging and neuritic plaque density. JAMA Neurol. 72: 2015; 287
dc.identifier.citedreferenceC.C. Rowe, S. Pejoska, R.S. Mulligan, G. Jones, J.G. Chan, S. Svensson, et al. Head‐to‐head comparison of 11C‐PiB and 18F‐AZD4694 (NAV4694) for β‐amyloid imaging in aging and dementia. J Nucl Med. 54: 2013; 880 – 886
dc.identifier.citedreferenceR. Vandenberghe, K. Van Laere, A. Ivanoiu, E. Salmon, C. Bastin, E. Triau, et al. 18F‐flutemetamol amyloid imaging in Alzheimer disease and mild cognitive impairment: a phase 2 trial. Ann Neurol. 68: 2010; 319 – 329
dc.identifier.citedreferenceH. Barthel, H.J. Gertz, S. Dresel, O. Peters, P. Bartenstein, K. Buerger, et al. Cerebral amyloid‐β PET with florbetaben (18F) in patients with Alzheimer’s disease and healthy controls: a multicentre phase 2 diagnostic study. Lancet Neurol. 10: 2011; 424 – 435
dc.identifier.citedreferenceC.M. Clark, M.J. Pontecorvo, T.G. Beach, B.J. Bedell, R.E. Coleman, P.M. Doraiswamy, et al. Cerebral PET with florbetapir compared with neuropathology at autopsy for detection of neuritic amyloid‐beta plaques: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol. 11: 2012; 669 – 678
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.