<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://dirros.openscience.si/IzpisGradiva.php?id=28432"><dc:title>Metabolic brain networks in dementia with Lewy bodies</dc:title><dc:creator>Perovnik,	Matej	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Simončič,	Urban	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Jamšek,	Jan	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Gregorič Kramberger,	Milica	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Brumberg,	Joachim	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Meyer,	Philipp Tobias	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Perani,	Daniela	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Trošt,	Maja	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>Alzheimer's disease</dc:subject><dc:subject>Lewy body dementia</dc:subject><dc:subject>FDG PET</dc:subject><dc:subject>functional imaging</dc:subject><dc:subject>mild cognitive impairment</dc:subject><dc:description>Background: Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is the second most common neurodegenerative dementia, yet it remains under-recognised and misdiagnosed, which delays treatment, causes inaccurate prognosis and limits research opportunities. Imaging with 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) is a supportive DLB biomarker. We evaluated a multivariate, quantifiable metabolic network biomarker, termed DLB-related pattern (DLBRP), for its further clinical translation across centres and disease stages. Methods: We analysed demographic, clinical and FDG PET imaging data of 1180 participants from 14 tertiary centres and two multicentre datasets. We included 379 DLB, 28 mild cognitive impairment-LB (MCI-LB), 195 dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (ADD), 172 MCI-AD without α-synuclein co-pathology (MCI-AD-S-), and 73 MCI-AD with α-synuclein co-pathology (S+) patients, along with a comparative group of 333 normal controls (NCs). From the scans, we calculated the expression of DLBRP, AD-related pattern (ADRP) and Parkinson's disease-related pattern (PDRP) and compared them across groups. DLBRP scores were correlated with clinical measurements. Results: Across independent cohorts, DLBRP robustly distinguished DLB from NCs (sensitivity &gt;89%, specificity &gt;90%), and scores correlated with Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Part III and independently predicted Mini-Mental State Examination. DLBRP was elevated already in MCI-LB. In a small longitudinal dataset, we observed steady increases in DLBRP expression with scores exceeding the diagnostic threshold prior to dementia onset. DLBRP and PDRP discriminated DLB from ADD (sensitivity, 74%-90%; specificity, 80%). In MCI-AD groups, ADRP was expressed, whereas DLBRP and PDRP were increased only in MCI-AD-S+, although comparatively less than in MCI-LB. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the value of DLBRP in diagnosing prodromal and manifest DLB and distinguishing them from their AD counterparts. While overlap between patterns may reflect actual co-pathology, this possibility cannot be accepted without thorough pathological confirmation. The current findings support the use of DLBRP in patient evaluation and in future trial design.</dc:description><dc:date>2025</dc:date><dc:date>2026-03-19 08:58:29</dc:date><dc:type>Neznano</dc:type><dc:identifier>28432</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
