Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 23, 2026

Hybrid PET/MRI Imaging of Alzheimer's Disease Based on 18F-AV-1451
Published on: April 18, 2025
Visual versus quantitative tau-PET Braak staging in Alzheimer's disease using [18F]MK6240
Arthur C Macedo1,2,3, Karine Provost3,4, Jean-Paul Soucy3
1Translational Neuroimaging Laboratory, The McGill University Research Centre for Studies in Aging, McConnell Brain Imaging Centre (BIC), Montreal Neurological Institute, 6875 LaSalle Blvd, Montréal, QC, H4H 1R3, Canada.
Purpose:
The 2024 Alzheimer's Association Workgroup research framework designates tau proteinopathy (T2) as a key element for Alzheimer's disease (AD) staging, but optimal staging approaches have yet to be determined. Here, we compared visual and quantitative tau-PET-based Braak staging as candidate strategies to implement T2 biological staging in vivo.
Methods:
We included 140 participants from the TRIAD cohort who underwent [1⁸F]MK6240 tau-PET. Quantitative Braak staging (qBraak) was derived from regional SUVR thresholds, whereas visual Braak staging (vBraak) was independently performed by three nuclear medicine physicians using an adapted interpretation algorithm. Inter-rater and inter-method agreement were assessed using Cohen's and Fleiss' κ statistics. Associations with clinical severity, cortical thickness, plasma pTau217, and cortical tau extent were examined. Diagnostic performance for identifying amyloid-positive cognitively impaired individuals was evaluated.
Results:
vBraak demonstrated substantial to nearly perfect inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.65-0.93). Agreement between vBraak and qBraak was moderate when stages were treated categorically (κ = 0.51), but substantial when their ordinal nature was considered (weighted κ up to 0.73). Both strategies showed comparable associations with clinical severity and neurodegeneration. vBraak was more sensitive to amyloid-β-positive cognitive impairment and identified intermediate-stage involvement at lower global tau extent. Visual-quantitative discordant cases were primarily attributable to off-target binding or spatially heterogeneous tau patterns.
Conclusion:
Both vBraak and qBraak staging provide complementary and largely concordant approaches for operationalizing T2 staging. Quantitative methods enable scalable, group-level analyses, whereas visual assessment remains essential for identifying atypical tau patterns and informing clinically relevant decision-making.