Clinical validity of increased cortical uptake of [18F]flortaucipir on PET as a biomarker for Alzheimer's disease in the context of a structured 5-phase biomarker development framework.

PURPOSE: In 2017, the Geneva Alzheimer's disease (AD) Biomarker Roadmap initiative adapted the framework of the systematic validation of oncological diagnostic biomarkers to AD biomarkers, with the aim to accelerate their development and implementation in clinical practice. With this work, we assess the maturity of [18F]flortaucipir PET and define its research priorities. METHODS: The level of maturity of [18F]flortaucipir was assessed based on the AD Biomarker Roadmap. The framework assesses analytical validity (phases 1-2), clinical validity (phases 3-4), and clinical utility (phase 5). RESULTS: The main aims of phases 1 (rationale for use) and 2 (discriminative ability) have been achieved. [18F]Flortaucipir binds with high affinity to paired helical filaments of tau and has favorable kinetic properties and excellent discriminative accuracy for AD. The majority of secondary aims of phase 2 were fully achieved. Multiple studies showed high correlations between ante-mortem [18F]flortaucipir PET and post-mortem tau (as assessed by histopathology), and also the effects of covariates on tracer binding are well studied. The aims of phase 3 (early detection ability) were only partially or preliminarily achieved, and the aims of phases 4 and 5 were not achieved. CONCLUSION: Current literature provides partial evidence for clinical utility of [18F]flortaucipir PET. The aims for phases 1 and 2 were mostly achieved. Phase 3 studies are currently ongoing. Future studies including representative MCI populations and a focus on healthcare outcomes are required to establish full maturity of phases 4 and 5.

Tau PET and relative cerebral blood flow in dementia with Lewy bodies: A PET study.

PURPOSE: Alpha-synuclein often co-occurs with Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology in Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB). From a dynamic [18F]flortaucipir PET scan we derived measures of both tau binding and relative cerebral blood flow (rCBF). We tested whether regional tau binding or rCBF differed between DLB patients and AD patients and controls and examined their association with clinical characteristics of DLB. METHODS: Eighteen patients with probable DLB, 65 AD patients and 50 controls underwent a dynamic 130-minute [18F]flortaucipir PET scan. DLB patients with positive biomarkers for AD based on cerebrospinal fluid or amyloid PET were considered as DLB with AD pathology (DLB-AD+). Receptor parametric mapping (cerebellar gray matter reference region) was used to extract regional binding potential (BPND) and R1, reflecting (AD-specific) tau pathology and rCBF, respectively. First, we performed regional comparisons of [18F]flortaucipir BPND and R1 between diagnostic groups. In DLB patients only, we performed regression analyses between regional [18F]flortaucipir BPND, R1 and performance on ten neuropsychological tests. RESULTS: Regional [18F]flortaucipir BPND in DLB was comparable with tau binding in controls (p > 0.05). Subtle higher tau binding was observed in DLB-AD+ compared to DLB-AD- in the medial temporal and parietal lobe (both p < 0.05). Occipital and lateral parietal R1 was lower in DLB compared to AD and controls (all p < 0.01). Lower frontal R1 was associated with impaired performance on digit span forward (standardized beta, stß = 0.72) and category fluency (stß = 0.69) tests. Lower parietal R1 was related to lower delayed (stß = 0.50) and immediate (stß = 0.48) recall, VOSP number location (stß = 0.70) and fragmented letters (stß = 0.59) scores. Lower occipital R1 was associated to worse performance on VOSP fragmented letters (stß = 0.61), all p < 0.05. CONCLUSION: The amount of tau binding in DLB was minimal and did not differ from controls. However, there were DLB-specific occipital and lateral parietal relative cerebral blood flow reductions compared to both controls and AD patients. Regional rCBF, but not tau binding, was related to cognitive impairment. This indicates that assessment of rCBF may give more insight into disease mechanisms in DLB than tau PET.

Health-care providers' perspectives on childhood cancer treatment in Manado, Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survival in low-income countries is low. OBJECTIVE: Our study investigated health-care providers' perspectives on childhood cancer treatment in Indonesia. Their health beliefs and attitudes toward parental financial difficulties, protocol adherence, parental education, and communication were explored. METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was filled in by 222 health-care providers (156 doctors, 51 nurses, 6 social workers, 9 administrators) RESULTS: Health of children with cancer is beyond doctor's control and determined by luck, fate or God according to 35% of health-care providers, 30% were uncertain about this statement, and 35% disagreed. Combination of chemotherapy and alternative treatment is best to achieve cure according to 15% of health-care providers, 50% were uncertain, and 35% disagreed. Prosperous parents adhere better with treatment (67%). Doctors adhere better with cancer treatment for prosperous patients (55%). When dealing with poor families, less elaborate explanation is given (62%), more difficult vocabulary is used (49%), and less cooperation is offered (46%). Reasons for non-adherence with treatment protocol were as follows: financial difficulties parents (82%), side-effects (77%), lack of motivation parents (75%), and inadequate drugs supply at pharmacy (70%). Information about cancer and treatment makes parents more afraid or depressed about future, and parents prefer not to know according to 27% of health-care providers, 20% were uncertain, and 53% disagreed. Communication with parents is hindered by differences in status and social hierarchical structures (83%). CONCLUSIONS: Health-care providers' beliefs about childhood cancer treatment are characterized by much uncertainty and contradiction. This likely affects adherence of health-care providers, parents, and childhood cancer treatment outcome.