Tau‐PET to predict conversion from mild cognitive impairment to dementia; a head‐to‐head comparison against amyloid‐PET and MRI

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundIn contrast to amyloid‐PET and MRI, tau‐PET imaging has not been integrated into clinical practice even though it shows a close relationship with clinical symptoms. With the present study, we aim to assess the performance of tau‐PET to predict conversion to dementia (all‐cause and AD) in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and compare it with amyloid‐PET and MRI.MethodWe selected participants from an ongoing multicenter study (n = 408, Table 1). The following ROIs were used to define quantified thresholds for positivity using an independent cognitively unimpaired reference group: a temporal meta‐region for tau‐PET and an AD‐susceptible temporoparietal region for MRI‐based cortical thickness. For amyloid‐PET, we used the standard Centiloid mask and a published threshold of 27 Centiloids to determine positivity. We additionally performed visual reads for all imaging modalities. We used Cox proportional hazard, logistic regression, and receiver operating curve (ROC) analyses to assess the performance of amyloid‐PET (A), tau‐PET (T), and MRI (N) to predict progression from MCI to dementia over a mean follow‐up period of 2 years.ResultHazard ratios indicated that tau‐PET and amyloid‐PET positivity (both when assessed quantitatively and using visual reads) conveyed a greater risk of progression to dementia than MRI, and that a combination of A+ and T+ (or N+) conveyed a greater risk than A‐T‐N‐ or isolated A+ or T+ (Figure 1). ROC analyses revealed that only tau‐PET performed better than demographics alone when predicting all‐cause dementia while both amyloid‐ and tau‐PET performed better than demographics and MRI when predicting AD dementia. LASSO logistic regression revealed that the optimal model to predict conversion from MCI to all‐cause dementia included a quantitative MRI marker and tau‐PET visual read. For optimal prediction of AD dementia specifically, the quantitative measure of amyloid‐PET was added in addition to the quantitative MRI marker and the tau‐PET visual read (Table 2).ConclusionAmong individuals with MCI, tau‐PET performs best when predicting dementia, and can be optimized when combined with MRI. For AD dementia, tau‐PET and amyloid‐PET are the best‐performing modalities, but an optimal prediction is again achieved when combined with MRI.