Facilitating the use of the target product profile in academic research: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The Target Product Profile (TPP) is a tool used in industry to guide development strategies by addressing user needs and fostering effective communication among stakeholders. However, they are not frequently used in academic research, where they may be equally useful. This systematic review aims to extract the features of accessible TPPs, to identify commonalities and facilitate their integration in academic research methodology. METHODS: We searched peer-reviewed papers published in English developing TPPs for different products and health conditions in four biomedical databases. Interrater agreement, computed on random abstract and paper sets (Cohen's Kappa; percentage agreement with zero tolerance) was > 0.91. We interviewed experts from industry contexts to gain insight on the process of TPP development, and extracted general and specific features on TPP use and structure. RESULTS: 138 papers were eligible for data extraction. Of them, 92% (n = 128) developed a new TPP, with 41.3% (n = 57) focusing on therapeutics. The addressed disease categories were diverse; the largest (47.1%, n = 65) was infectious diseases. Only one TPP was identified for several fields, including global priorities like dementia. Our analyses found that 56.5% of papers (n = 78) was authored by academics, and 57.8% of TPPs (n = 80) featured one threshold level of product performance. The number of TPP features varied widely across and within product types (n = 3-44). Common features included purpose/context of use, shelf life for drug stability and validation aspects. Most papers did not describe the methods used to develop the TPP. We identified aspects to be taken into account to build and report TPPs, as a starting point for more focused initiatives guiding use by academics. DISCUSSION: TPPs are used in academic research mostly for infectious diseases and have heterogeneous features. Our extraction of key features and common structures helps to understand the tool and widen its use in academia. This is of particular relevance for areas of notable unmet needs, like dementia. Collaboration between stakeholders is key for innovation. Tools to streamline communication such as TPPs would support the development of products and services in academia as well as industry.

Predicting cognitive decline in older people by structural and molecular imaging.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Availability of possible disease modifying treatments and the recognition of predementia stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD) have raised awareness for the prognostic and predictive role of biomarkers, particularly imaging markers. RECENT FINDINGS: The positive predictive value of amyloid PET for the transition to prodromal AD or AD dementia in cognitively normal people is below 25%. Evidence for tau PET, FDG-PET and structural MRI is even more limited. In people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), imaging markers yield positive predictive values above 60% with moderate advantages for amyloid PET over the other modalities and an added value for the combination of molecular with downstream neurodegeneration markers. SUMMARY: In cognitively normal people, imaging is not recommended for individual prognosis due to lack of sufficient predictive accuracy. Such measures should be restricted to risk enrichment in clinical trials. In people with MCI, amyloid PET and, to a somewhat lesser extent, tau PET, FDG-PET, and MRI yield relevant predictive accuracy for clinical counseling as part of a comprehensive diagnostic program in tertiary care units. Future studies should focus on the systematic and patient-centered implementation of imaging markers in evidence-based care-pathways for people with prodromal AD.

Feasibility of a standard cognitive assessment in European academic memory clinics.

INTRODUCTION: Standardized cognitive assessment would enhance diagnostic reliability across memory clinics. An expert consensus adapted the Uniform Dataset (UDS)-3 for European centers, the clinician's UDS (cUDS). This study assessed its implementation acceptability and feasibility. METHODS: We developed a survey investigating barriers, facilitators, and willingness to implement the cUDS. With a mixed-methods design, we analyzed data from academic memory clinics. RESULTS: Seventy-eight percent of responding clinicians were experienced neuropsychologists/psychologists and 22% were medical specialists coming from 18 European countries. Sixty-five percent clinicians were willing to implement cUDS. General barriers related to implementation (43%) and clinical-methodological domains (21%). Favorable clinicians reported finances (15%) and digitalization (9%) as facilitating, but unavailability of local norms (23%) as hindering. Unfavorable clinicians reported logistical (23%) and time issues (18%). DISCUSSION: Despite challenges, data showed moderate clinicians' acceptability and requirements to improve feasibility. Nonetheless, these results come from academic clinicians. The next steps will require feasibility evaluation in non-academic contexts.

Clinical research in dementia: A perspective on implementing innovation.

The increasing global prevalence of dementia demands concrete actions that are aimed strategically at optimizing processes that drive clinical innovation. The first step in this direction requires outlining hurdles in the transition from research to practice. The different parties needed to support translational processes have communication mismatches; methodological gaps hamper evidence-based decision-making; and data are insufficient to provide reliable estimates of long-term health benefits and costs in decisional models. Pilot projects are tackling some of these gaps, but appropriate methods often still need to be devised or adapted to the dementia field. A consistent implementation perspective along the whole translational continuum, explicitly defined and shared among the relevant stakeholders, should overcome the "research-versus-adoption" dichotomy, and tackle the implementation cliff early on. Concrete next steps may consist of providing tools that support the effective participation of heterogeneous stakeholders and agreeing on a definition of clinical significance that facilitates the selection of proper outcome measures.

Harmonizing neuropsychological assessment for mild neurocognitive disorders in Europe.

INTRODUCTION: Harmonized neuropsychological assessment for neurocognitive disorders, an international priority for valid and reliable diagnostic procedures, has been achieved only in specific countries or research contexts. METHODS: To harmonize the assessment of mild cognitive impairment in Europe, a workshop (Geneva, May 2018) convened stakeholders, methodologists, academic, and non-academic clinicians and experts from European, US, and Australian harmonization initiatives. RESULTS: With formal presentations and thematic working-groups we defined a standard battery consistent with the U.S. Uniform DataSet, version 3, and homogeneous methodology to obtain consistent normative data across tests and languages. Adaptations consist of including two tests specific to typical Alzheimer's disease and behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia. The methodology for harmonized normative data includes consensus definition of cognitively normal controls, classification of confounding factors (age, sex, and education), and calculation of minimum sample sizes. DISCUSSION: This expert consensus allows harmonizing the diagnosis of neurocognitive disorders across European countries and possibly beyond.

Clinical validity of increased cortical binding of tau ligands of the THK family and PBB3 on PET as biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease in the context of a structured 5-phase development framework.

PURPOSE: The research community has focused on defining reliable biomarkers for the early detection of the pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD). In 2017, the Geneva AD Biomarker Roadmap initiative adapted the framework for the systematic validation of oncological biomarkers to AD, with the aim to accelerate their development and implementation in clinical practice. The aim of this work was to assess the validation status of tau PET ligands of the THK family and PBB3 as imaging biomarkers for AD, based on the Biomarker Roadmap methodology. METHODS: A panel of experts in AD biomarkers convened in November 2019 at a 2-day workshop in Geneva. The level of clinical validity of tau PET ligands of the THK family and PBB3 was assessed based on the 5-phase development framework before the meeting and discussed during the workshop. RESULTS: PET radioligands of the THK family discriminate well between healthy controls and patients with AD dementia (phase 2; partly achieved) and recent evidence suggests an accurate diagnostic accuracy at the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) stage of the disease (phase 3; partly achieved). The phases 2 and 3 were considered not achieved for PBB3 since no evidence exists about the ligand's diagnostic accuracy. Preliminary evidence exists about the secondary aims of each phase for all ligands. CONCLUSION: Much work remains for completing the aims of phases 2 and 3 and replicating the available evidence. However, it is unlikely that the validation process for these tracers will be completed, given the presence of off-target binding and the development of second-generation tracers with improved binding and pharmacokinetic properties.

Diagnostic value of amyloid-PET and tau-PET: a head-to-head comparison.

PURPOSE: Assess the individual and combined diagnostic value of amyloid-PET and tau-PET in a memory clinic population. METHODS: Clinical reports of 136 patients were randomly assigned to two diagnostic pathways: AMY-TAU, amyloid-PET is presented before tau-PET; and TAU-AMY, tau-PET is presented before amyloid-PET. Two neurologists independently assessed all reports with a balanced randomized design, and expressed etiological diagnosis and diagnostic confidence (50-100%) three times: (i) at baseline based on the routine diagnostic workup, (ii) after the first exam (amyloid-PET for the AMY-TAU pathway, and tau-PET for the TAU-AMY pathway), and (iii) after the remaining exam. The main outcomes were changes in diagnosis (from AD to non-AD or vice versa) and in diagnostic confidence. RESULTS: Amyloid-PET and tau-PET, when presented as the first exam, resulted in a change of etiological diagnosis in 28% (p = 0.006) and 28% (p < 0.001) of cases, and diagnostic confidence increased by 18% (p < 0.001) and 19% (p < 0.001) respectively, with no differences between exams (p > 0.05). We observed a stronger impact of a negative amyloid-PET versus a negative tau-PET (p = 0.014). When added as the second exam, amyloid-PET and tau-PET resulted in a further change in etiological diagnosis in 6% (p = 0.077) and 9% (p = 0.149) of cases, and diagnostic confidence increased by 4% (p < 0.001) and 5% (p < 0.001) respectively, with no differences between exams (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Amyloid-PET and tau-PET significantly impacted diagnosis and diagnostic confidence in a similar way, although a negative amyloid-PET has a stronger impact on diagnosis than a negative tau-PET. Adding either of the two as second exam further improved diagnostic confidence. TRIAL NUMBER: PB 2016-01346.

Clinical validity of second-generation tau PET tracers as biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease in the context of a structured 5-phase development framework.

PURPOSE: In 2017, the Geneva Alzheimer's disease (AD) strategic biomarker roadmap initiative proposed a framework of the systematic validation AD biomarkers to harmonize and accelerate their development and implementation in clinical practice. Here, we use this framework to examine the translatability of the second-generation tau PET tracers into the clinical context. METHODS: All available literature was systematically searched based on a set of search terms that related independently to analytic validity (phases 1-2), clinical validity (phase 3-4), and clinical utility (phase 5). The progress on each of the phases was determined based on scientific criteria applied for each phase and coded as fully, partially, preliminary achieved or not achieved at all. RESULTS: The validation of the second-generation tau PET tracers has successfully passed the analytical phase 1 of the strategic biomarker roadmap. Assay definition studies showed evidence on the superiority over first-generation tau PET tracers in terms of off-target binding. Studies have partially achieved the primary aim of the analytical validity stage (phase 2), and preliminary evidence has been provided for the assessment of covariates on PET signal retention. Studies investigating of the clinical validity in phases 3, 4, and 5 are still underway. CONCLUSION: The current literature provides overall preliminary evidence on the establishment of the second-generation tau PET tracers into the clinical context, thereby successfully addressing some methodological issues from the tau PET tracer of the first generation. Nevertheless, bigger cohort studies, longitudinal follow-up, and examination of diverse disease population are still needed to gauge their clinical validity.

The strategic biomarker roadmap for the validation of Alzheimer's diagnostic biomarkers: methodological update.

BACKGROUND: The 2017 Alzheimer's disease (AD) Strategic Biomarker Roadmap (SBR) structured the validation of AD diagnostic biomarkers into 5 phases, systematically assessing analytical validity (Phases 1-2), clinical validity (Phases 3-4), and clinical utility (Phase 5) through primary and secondary Aims. This framework allows to map knowledge gaps and research priorities, accelerating the route towards clinical implementation. Within an initiative aimed to assess the development of biomarkers of tau pathology, we revised this methodology consistently with progress in AD research. METHODS: We critically appraised the adequacy of the 2017 Biomarker Roadmap within current diagnostic frameworks, discussed updates at a workshop convening the Alzheimer's Association and 8 leading AD biomarker research groups, and detailed the methods to allow consistent assessment of aims achievement for tau and other AD diagnostic biomarkers. RESULTS: The 2020 update applies to all AD diagnostic biomarkers. In Phases 2-3, we admitted a greater variety of study designs (e.g., cross-sectional in addition to longitudinal) and reference standards (e.g., biomarker confirmation in addition to clinical progression) based on construct (in addition to criterion) validity. We structured a systematic data extraction to enable transparent and formal evidence assessment procedures. Finally, we have clarified issues that need to be addressed to generate data eligible to evidence-to-decision procedures. DISCUSSION: This revision allows for more versatile and precise assessment of existing evidence, keeps up with theoretical developments, and helps clinical researchers in producing evidence suitable for evidence-to-decision procedures. Compliance with this methodology is essential to implement AD biomarkers efficiently in clinical research and diagnostics.

Outcomes of clinical utility in amyloid-PET studies: state of art and future perspectives.

PURPOSE: To review how outcomes of clinical utility are operationalized in current amyloid-PET validation studies, to prepare for formal assessment of clinical utility of amyloid-PET-based diagnosis. METHODS: Systematic review of amyloid-PET research studies published up to April 2020 that included outcomes of clinical utility. We extracted and analyzed (a) outcome categories, (b) their definition, and (c) their methods of assessment. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were eligible. (a) Outcome categories were clinician-centered (found in 25/32 studies, 78%), patient-/caregiver-centered (in 9/32 studies, 28%), and health economics-centered (5/32, 16%). (b) Definition: Outcomes were mainly defined by clinical researchers; only the ABIDE study expressly included stakeholders in group discussions. Clinician-centered outcomes mainly consisted of incremental diagnostic value (25/32, 78%) and change in patient management (17/32, 53%); patient-/caregiver-centered outcomes considered distress after amyloid-pet-based diagnosis disclosure (8/32, 25%), including quantified burden of procedure for patients' outcomes (n = 8) (1/8, 12.5%), impact of disclosure of results (6/8, 75%), and psychological implications of biomarker-based diagnosis (75%); and health economics outcomes focused on costs to achieve a high-confidence etiological diagnosis (5/32, 16%) and impact on quality of life (1/32, 3%). (c) Assessment: all outcome categories were operationalized inconsistently across studies, employing 26 different tools without formal rationale for selection. CONCLUSION: Current studies validating amyloid-PET already assessed outcomes for clinical utility, although non-clinician-based outcomes were inconsistent. A wider participation of stakeholders may help produce a more thorough and systematic definition and assessment of outcomes of clinical utility and help collect evidence informing decisions on reimbursement of amyloid-PET.

The A/T/N model applied through imaging biomarkers in a memory clinic.

PURPOSE: The A/T/N model is a research framework proposed to investigate Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathological bases (i.e., amyloidosis A, neurofibrillary tangles T, and neurodegeneration N). The application of this system on clinical populations is still limited. The aim of the study is to evaluate the topography of T distribution by 18F-flortaucipir PET in relation to A and N and to describe the A/T/N status through imaging biomarkers in memory clinic patients. METHODS: Eighty-one patients with subjective and objective cognitive impairment were classified as A+/A- and N+/N- through amyloid PET and structural MRI. Tau deposition was compared across A/N subgroups at voxel level. T status was defined through a global cut point based on A/N subgroups and subjects were categorized following the A/T/N model. RESULTS: A+N+ and A+N- subgroups showed higher tau burden compared to A-N- group, with A+N- showing significant deposition limited to the medial and lateral temporal regions. Global cut point discriminated A+N+ and A+N- from A-N- subjects. On A/T/N classification, 23% of patients showed a negative biomarker profile, 58% fell within the Alzheimer's continuum, and 19% of the sample was characterized by non-AD pathologic change. CONCLUSION: Medial and lateral temporal regions represent a site of significant tau accumulation in A+ subjects and possibly a useful marker of early clinical changes. This is the first study in which the A/T/N model is applied using 18F-flortaucipir PET in a memory clinic population. The majority of patients showed a profile consistent with the Alzheimer's continuum, while a minor percentage showed a profile suggestive of possible other neurodegenerative diseases. These results support the applicability of the A/T/N model in clinical practice.

Incremental value of amyloid-PET versus CSF in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease.

PURPOSE: To compare the incremental diagnostic value of amyloid-PET and CSF (Aß42, tau, and phospho-tau) in AD diagnosis in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia, in order to improve the definition of diagnostic algorithm. METHODS: Two independent dementia experts provided etiological diagnosis and relative diagnostic confidence in 71 patients on 3 rounds, based on (1) clinical, neuropsychological, and structural MRI information alone; (2) adding one biomarker (CSF amyloid and tau levels or amyloid-PET with a balanced randomized design); and (3) adding the other biomarker. RESULTS: Among patients with a pre-biomarker diagnosis of AD, negative PET induced significantly more diagnostic changes than amyloid-negative CSF at both rounds 2 (CSF 67%, PET 100%, P = 0.028) and 3 (CSF 0%; PET 78%, P < 0.001); PET induced a diagnostic confidence increase significantly higher than CSF on both rounds 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: Amyloid-PET should be prioritized over CSF biomarkers in the diagnostic workup of patients investigated for suspected AD, as it provides greater changes in diagnosis and diagnostic confidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT no.: 2014-005389-31.

Comparison of visual criteria for amyloid-PET reading: could criteria merging reduce inter-rater variability?

BACKGROUND: Three different amyloid tracers labeled with 18-flourine have been introduced into clinical use. The leaflets of tracers indicate different visual criteria for PET reporting. In clinical practice, it is not yet ascertained whether these criteria are equivalent in terms of diagnostic accuracy or if anyone is better than another. We aimed to evaluate the inter and intra-rater variability of visual assessment of 18F-Florbetapir PET/CT images among six independent readers with different clinical experience. METHODS: We analyzed 252 PET/CT scans, visually assessed by each reader three times, applying independently the three different reading criteria proposed. Each reader evaluated the regional uptake specifying for each cortical region a numeric value of grading of positivity in order to assign a final score. At the end of each reading a level of confidence was determined by assigning a score from 0 (negative) to 4 (positive). After first reading, those cases in which the evaluations by two experienced readers did not match (discordant cases) were independently reevaluated merging all the three different visual interpretation criteria. RESULTS: Good agreement was observed for visual interpretation among the six readers' confidence-level using independently the three visual reading criteria: ICC=0.83 (0.80-0.86) for 18F-florbetapir, ICC=0.84 (0.81-0.87) for 18F-florbetaben, and ICC=0.86 (0.83-0.88) for 18F-flutemetamol reading. A good inter-rater agreement was observed for final-score too: ICC=0.74 (0.70-0.78) for 18F-florbetapir; ICC=0.82 (0.79-0.85) for 18F-florbetaben; ICC=0.84 (0.81-0.87) for 18F-flutemetamol. Intra-rater agreement was good for final-score (from 0.76 to 0.90; P<0.001) and confidence-level (Spearman's rho from 0.89 to 1.00; P<0.001). Disagreement between the two experienced readers was observed in 22 of 252 cases (9%). The agreement converged over a second round of independent reading in 12 of 22 cases (54%), by merging all the criteria. CONCLUSIONS: All the criteria proposed are useful to determine the grading of positivity or negativity of amyloid deposition and their merging improves the diagnostic confidence and provides a better agreement.

AMYPAD Diagnostic and Patient Management Study: Rationale and design.

INTRODUCTION: Reimbursement of amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) is lagging due to the lack of definitive evidence on its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness. The Amyloid Imaging to Prevent Alzheimer's Disease-Diagnostic and Patient Management Study (AMYPAD-DPMS) is designed to fill this gap. METHODS: AMYPAD-DPMS is a phase 4, multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study. Nine hundred patients with subjective cognitive decline plus, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia possibly due to Alzheimer's disease will be randomized to ARM1, amyloid-PET performed early in the diagnostic workup; ARM2, amyloid-PET performed after 8 months; and ARM3, amyloid-PET performed whenever the physician chooses to do so. ENDPOINTS: The primary endpoint is the difference between ARM1 and ARM2 in the proportion of patients receiving a very-high-confidence etiologic diagnosis after 3 months. Secondary endpoints address diagnosis and diagnostic confidence, diagnostic/therapeutic management, health economics and patient-related outcomes, and methods for image quantitation. EXPECTED IMPACTS: AMYPAD-DPMS will supply physicians and health care payers with real-world data to plan management decisions.

Assessing FDG-PET diagnostic accuracy studies to develop recommendations for clinical use in dementia.

BACKGROUND: FDG-PET is frequently used as a marker of synaptic damage to diagnose dementing neurodegenerative disorders. We aimed to adapt the items of evidence quality to FDG-PET diagnostic studies, and assess the evidence available in current literature to assist Delphi decisions for European recommendations for clinical use. METHODS: Based on acknowledged methodological guidance, we defined the domains, specific to FDG-PET, required to assess the quality of evidence in 21 literature searches addressing as many Population Intervention Comparison Outcome (PICO) questions. We ranked findings for each PICO and fed experts making Delphi decisions for recommending clinical use. RESULTS: Among the 1435 retrieved studies, most lacked validated measures of test performance, an adequate gold standard, and head-to-head comparison of FDG-PET and clinical diagnosis, and only 58 entered detailed assessment. Only two studies assessed the accuracy of the comparator (clinical diagnosis) versus any kind of gold-/reference-standard. As to the index-test (FDG-PET-based diagnosis), an independent gold-standard was available in 24% of the examined papers; 38% used an acceptable reference-standard (clinical follow-up); and 38% compared FDG-PET-based diagnosis only to baseline clinical diagnosis. These methodological limitations did not allow for deriving recommendations from evidence. DISCUSSION: An incremental diagnostic value of FDG-PET versus clinical diagnosis or lack thereof cannot be derived from the current literature. Many of the observed limitations may easily be overcome, and we outlined them as research priorities to improve the quality of current evidence. Such improvement is necessary to outline evidence-based guidelines. The available data were anyway provided to expert clinicians who defined interim recommendations.

Automated assessment of FDG-PET for differential diagnosis in patients with neurodegenerative disorders.

PURPOSE: To review literature until November 2015 and reach a consensus on whether automatic semi-quantification of brain FDG-PET is useful in the clinical setting for neurodegenerative disorders. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar. Papers were selected with a lower limit of 30 patients (no limits with autopsy confirmation). Consensus recommendations were developed through a Delphi procedure, based on the expertise of panelists, who were also informed about the availability and quality of evidence, assessed by an independent methodology team. RESULTS: Critical outcomes were available in nine among the 17 papers initially selected. Only three papers performed a direct comparison between visual and automated assessment and quantified the incremental value provided by the latter. Sensitivity between visual and automatic analysis is similar but automatic assessment generally improves specificity and marginally accuracy. Also, automated assessment increases diagnostic confidence. As expected, performance of visual analysis is reported to depend on the expertise of readers. CONCLUSIONS: Tools for semi-quantitative evaluation are recommended to assist the nuclear medicine physician in reporting brain FDG-PET pattern in neurodegenerative conditions. However, heterogeneity, complexity, and drawbacks of these tools should be known by users to avoid misinterpretation. Head-to-head comparisons and an effort to harmonize procedures are encouraged.

Clinical utility of FDG-PET in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Huntington's disease.

AIM: To evaluate the incremental value of FDG-PET over clinical tests in: (i) diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS); (ii) picking early signs of neurodegeneration in patients with a genetic risk of Huntington's disease (HD); and detecting metabolic changes related to cognitive impairment in (iii) ALS and (iv) HD patients. METHODS: Four comprehensive literature searches were conducted using the PICO model to extract evidence from relevant studies. An expert panel then voted using the Delphi method on these four diagnostic scenarios. RESULTS: The availability of evidence was good for FDG-PET utility to support the diagnosis of ALS, poor for identifying presymptomatic subjects carrying HD mutation who will convert to HD, and lacking for identifying cognitive-related metabolic changes in both ALS and HD. After the Delphi consensual procedure, the panel did not support the clinical use of FDG-PET for any of the four scenarios. CONCLUSION: Relative to other neurodegenerative diseases, the clinical use of FDG-PET in ALS and HD is still in its infancy. Once validated by disease-control studies, FDG-PET might represent a potentially useful biomarker for ALS diagnosis. FDG-PET is presently not justified as a routine investigation to predict conversion to HD, nor to detect evidence of brain dysfunction justifying cognitive decline in ALS and HD.

Clinical utility of FDG-PET for the clinical diagnosis in MCI.

PURPOSE: We aim to report the quality of accuracy studies investigating the utility of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET in supporting the diagnosis of prodromal Alzheimer's Disease (AD), frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and prodromal dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subjects, and the corresponding recommendations made by a panel of experts. METHODS: Seven panellist, four from the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, and three from the European Academy of Neurology, produced recommendations taking into consideration the incremental value of FDG-PET, as added on clinical-neuropsychological examination, to ascertain the aetiology of MCI (AD, FTLD or DLB). A literature search using harmonized population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) strings was performed, and an evidence assessment consistent with the European Federation of Neurological Societies guidance was provided. The consensual recommendation was achieved based on Delphi rounds. RESULTS: Fifty-four papers reported the comparison of interest. The selected papers allowed the identification of FDG patterns that characterized MCI due to AD, FTLD and DLB. While clinical outcome studies supporting the diagnosis of MCI due to AD showed varying accuracies (ranging from 58 to 100%) and varying areas under the receiver-operator characteristic curves (0.66 to 0.97), no respective data were identified for MCI due to FTLD or for MCI due to DLB. However, the high negative predictive value of FDG-PET and the existence of different disease-specific patterns of hypometabolism support the consensus recommendations for the clinical use of this imaging technique in MCI subjects. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET has clinical utility on a fair level of evidence in detecting MCI due to AD. Although promising also in detecting MCI due to FTLD and MCI due to DLB, more research is needed to ultimately judge the clinical utility of FDG-PET in these entities.