4.7 Article

In Vivo 18F-Flortaucipir PET Does Not Accurately Support the Staging of Progressive Supranuclear Palsy

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Volume 63, Issue 7, Pages 1052-1057

Publisher

SOC NUCLEAR MEDICINE INC
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.121.262985

Keywords

progressive supranuclear palsy; F-18-flortaucipir; staging; tau pathology; PET-to-autopsy studies

Funding

  1. Cambridge University Centre for Parkinson-Plus [RG95450]
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre [BRC1215-20014]
  3. Cambridge Brain Bank
  4. PSP Association (MAPT-PSP Award)
  5. Alzheimer's Research UK East-Network pump priming grant
  6. Wellcome Trust [220258]
  7. Medical Research Council [MR/P01271X/1, G1100464]
  8. Association of British Neurologists
  9. Patrick Berthoud Charitable Trust [RG99368]
  10. Alzheimer's Society [443 AS JF 18017]
  11. Evelyn Trust [RG84654]
  12. RCUK/UKRI (via a Research Innovation Fellowship - Medical Research Council [MR/R007446/1]
  13. Guarantors of Brain [G101149]
  14. AZ-Medimmune
  15. Janssen
  16. Lilly
  17. Alliance Medical
  18. Merck
  19. Rainwater Charitable Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that F-18-flortaucipir PET does not correspond to neuropathologic staging in PSP. The analytic approach seeking to mirror in vivo neuropathology staging with PET-to-autopsy correlational analyses might enable in vivo staging with next-generation tau PET tracers; however, further evidence and comparisons with postmortem data are needed.
Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by neuroglial tau pathology. A new staging system for PSP pathology postmortem has been described and validated. We used a data-driven approach to test whether postmortem pathologic staging in PSP can be reproduced in vivo with F-18-flortaucipir PET. Methods: Forty-two patients with probable PSP and 39 controls underwent F-18-flortaucipir PET. Conditional inference tree analyses on regional binding potential values identified absent/present pathology thresholds to define in vivo staging. Following the postmortem staging approach for PSP pathology, we evaluated the combinations of absent/present pathology (or abnormal/normal PET signal) across all regions to assign each participant to in vivo stages. ANOVA was applied to analyze differences among means of disease severity between stages. In vivo staging was compared with postmortem staging in 9 patients who also had postmortem confirmation of the diagnosis and stage. Results: Stage assignmentwas estimable in 41 patients: 10, 26, and 5 patients were classified in stage I/II, stage III/IV, and stage V/VI, respectively, whereas 1 patient was not classifiable. Explorative substaging identified 2 patients in stage I, 8 in stage II, 9 in stage III, 17 in stage IV, and 5 in stage V. However, the nominal F-18-flortaucipir-derived stage was not associated with clinical severity and was not indicative of pathology staging postmortem. Conclusion: F-18-flortaucipir PET in vivo does not correspond to neuropathologic staging in PSP. This analytic approach, seeking to mirror in vivo neuropathology staging with PET-to-autopsy correlational analyses, might enable in vivo staging with next-generation tau PET tracers; however, further evidence and comparisons with postmortemdata are needed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available