% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Bauer:275967,
author = {Bauer, Theresa and Brendel, Matthias and Zaganjori, Mirlind
and Bernhardt, Alexander M and Jäck, Alexander and
Stöcklein, Sophia and Scheifele, Maximilian and Levin,
Johannes and van Eimeren, Thilo and Drzezga, Alexander and
Sabri, Osama and Barthel, Henryk and Perneczky, Robert and
Höglinger, Günter and Franzmeier, Nicolai and Gnörich,
Johannes},
collaboration = {Tauopathies, German Imaging Initiative for},
title = {{P}ragmatic algorithm for visual assessment of 4-{R}epeat
tauopathies in [18{F}]{PI}-2620 {PET} {S}cans.},
journal = {NeuroImage},
volume = {306},
issn = {1053-8119},
address = {Orlando, Fla.},
publisher = {Academic Press},
reportid = {DZNE-2025-00163},
pages = {121001},
year = {2025},
abstract = {Standardized evaluation of [18F]PI-2620 tau-PET scans in
4R-tauopathies represents an unmet need in clinical
practice. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness
of visual evaluation of [18F]PI-2620 images for diagnosing
4R-tauopathies and to develop a straight-forward reading
algorithm to improve objectivity and data reproducibility.A
total of 83 individuals with [18F]PI-2620 PET scans were
included. Participants were classified as probable
4R-tauopathies (n = 29), Alzheimer's disease (AD) (n = 20),
α-synucleinopathies (n = 15), and healthy controls (n = 19)
based on clinical criteria. Visual assessment of tau-PET
scans (choice: 4R-tauopathy, AD-tauopathy, no-tauopathy) was
conducted using either 20-40-minute or 40-60-minute
intervals, with raw (common) and cerebellar grey matter
scaled standardized reading settings (intensity-scaled). Two
readers evaluated scans independently and blinded, with a
third reader providing consensus in case of discrepant
primary evaluation. A regional analysis was performed using
the cortex, basal ganglia, midbrain, and dentate nucleus.
Sensitivity, specificity, and interrater agreement were
calculated for all settings and compared against the visual
reads of parametric images (0-60-minutes, distribution
volume ratios, DVR).Patients with 4R-tauopathies in contrast
to non-4R-tauopathies were detected at higher sensitivity in
the 20-40-minute frame (common: $79\%,$ scaled: $76\%)$
compared to the 40-60-minute frame (common: $55\%,$ scaled:
$62\%),$ albeit with reduced specificity in the common
setting (20-40-min: $78\%,$ 40-60-min: $95\%),$ which was
ameliorated in the intensity-scaled setting (20-40-min:
$91\%,$ 40-60-min: $96\%).$ Combined assessment of multiple
brain regions did not significantly improve diagnostic
sensitivity, compared to assessing the basal ganglia alone
$(76\%$ each). Evaluation of intensity-scaled parametric
images resulted in higher sensitivity compared to
intensity-scaled static scans $(86\%$ vs. $76\%)$ at similar
specificity $(89\%$ vs. $91\%).Visual$ reading of
[18F]PI-2620 tau-PET scans demonstrated reliable detection
of 4R-tauopathies, particularly when standardized processing
methods and early imaging windows were employed. Parametric
images should be preferred for visual assessment of
4R-tauopathies.},
keywords = {Reading algorithm (Other) / Tau-PET (Other) / Tauopathies
(Other) / Visual read (Other)},
cin = {AG Haass / Clinical Research (Munich) / AG Levin / AG
Boecker / AG Dichgans},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-2719)1110007 / I:(DE-2719)1111015 /
I:(DE-2719)1111016 / I:(DE-2719)1011202 /
I:(DE-2719)5000022},
pnm = {352 - Disease Mechanisms (POF4-352) / 353 - Clinical and
Health Care Research (POF4-353)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-352 / G:(DE-HGF)POF4-353},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:39798829},
doi = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2025.121001},
url = {https://pub.dzne.de/record/275967},
}