Abstract
A methodology for determining tau PET thresholds is needed to confidently detect early tau deposition. We compared multiple threshold-determining methods in participants who underwent either (18)F-flortaucipir or (18)F-MK-6240 PET scans. Methods: (18)F-flortaucipir (n = 798) and (18)F-MK-6240 (n = 216) scans were processed and sampled to obtain regional SUV ratios. Subsamples of the cohorts were based on participant diagnosis, age, amyloid-β status (positive or negative), and neurodegeneration status (positive or negative), creating older-adult (age ≥ 55 y) cognitively unimpaired (amyloid-β-negative, neurodegeneration-negative) and cognitively impaired (mild cognitive impairment/Alzheimer disease, amyloid-β-positive, neurodegeneration-positive) groups, and then were further subsampled via matching to reduce significant differences in diagnostic prevalence, age, and Mini-Mental State Examination score. We used the biostatistical estimation of tau threshold hallmarks (BETTH) algorithm to determine sensitivity and specificity in 6 composite regions. Results: Parametric double receiver operating characteristic analysis yielded the greatest joint sensitivity in 5 of the 6 regions, whereas hierarchic clustering, gaussian mixture modeling, and k-means clustering all yielded perfect joint specificity (2.00) in all regions. Conclusion: When (18)F-flortaucipir and (18)F-MK-6240 are used, Alzheimer disease-related tau status is best assessed using 2 thresholds, a sensitivity one based on parametric double receiver operating characteristic analysis and a specificity one based on gaussian mixture modeling, delimiting an uncertainty zone indicating participants who may require further evaluation.