Agenda: - Certification Platform: Training - I round - Beta testers proposals - Congress presentations - Paper “check for axes” XIII PMT meeting – October 24, 2012

Platform: Training Phase 2 Images (Scheltens=0,3) Feedback 6 Images (Scheltens=0,1,2,3,4,4) Feedback +-+- Certification set 10 Images (2 x Scheltens=0,1,2,3,4)Feedback +-+- Certification set

Platform: Training round I 10 naives created account 9 naives completed training round 1 5 tracers are planned to complete segmentations by early November 3 tracers are “uncertain” 3 tracers are lacking

Platform: Training round I

Platform: User Account

Platform: Administrator Visibility

Platform: Uploads UCF

Platform: MultiTracer Version

Platform: Parameters

Platform: Discrepancies in segmentation

Platform: Statistics - Users

Platform: Statistics - Segmentations

Platform

Expansion SOPs Sent to 5 possibly interested companies Proposal by Adam Schwarts Bioclinica also interested to fund cooperatively Will promote to next PPSB meeting (next week) Discussed with Maria Carrillo, she said that the AA may offer a neutral forum through which this could be funded/contracted.

- CTAD (October, ) Definition of the Harmonized Protocol for Hippocampal Segmentation - DGPPN Symposium 2012 Berlin (Andreas Fellgiebel, Stefan Teipel) Segmentation of the hippocampus: Towards a joint EADC-ADNI harmonized protocol - AAN (March 16-23, 2013) EADC-ADNI Benchmark Images of Harmonized Hippocampal Segmentation - AD/PD (March 6-10, 2013) Definition of Harmonized Protocol for Hippocampal Segmentation Congress Presentations

Papers describing the project Survey of protocols (preliminary phase; published, JAD 2011) Operationalization (preliminary phase; I revision, Alzheimer’s & Dementia, MS n. ADJ-D ) Axes check short report (Brescia Team, in progress) Delphi consensus (Brescia Team, in progress) Master tracers’ practice and reliability (Brescia Team, in progr) Development of certification platform (Duchesne and coll) Validation data (Brescia Team – companion paper 1) Protocol definition (Brescia Team – companion paper 2) Validation vs pathology (TBD) DONE IN PROGRESS PLANNED

VALIDATION VS CURRENT PROTOCOLS ASSESSMENT OF SOURCES OF VARIANCE TRAINING SET DEVELOPMENT VALIDATION VS PATHOLOGY GOLD STANDARD Harmonized Protocol ADNI scans: 2 x 5 Scheltens’s atrophy score x 2 sides x 2 magnet strengths (1.5-3T) Total per rater: 40 hippos Harmonized Protocol ADNI scans: 2 sides x 5 Scheltens’s atrophy scores x 3 time points (bl-1y-2y) x 3 scanners (+ bl) x 2 magnet strengths (1.5-3T) Total per rater: 240 hippos Assessment of variance due to rater and center Local Protocol ADNI scans: 2 x 5 Scheltens’s atrophy scores x 2 sides x 2 magnet strengths (1.5-3T) Harmonized Protocol ADNI scans: 2 x 5 Scheltens’s atrophy score x 2 sides x 2 magnet strength (1.5-3T) Total per rater: 40 hippos Harmonized Protocol: Pathological datasets: Mayo Clinic and NYU Total: about 40 hippos Training ADNI scans: 10 at 1.5T x 2 sides x 7 SUs x 2 tracing rounds Total per rater: 40 hippos 20 naïve tracers5 master tracers 1 tracer REFERENCE PROBABILISTIC MASKS with 95% C.I. QUALIFICATION Best 5 naïve tracers Assessment of variance due to side, trace-retrace, atrophy, time, scanner, rater TRAINING SET Assessment of agreement with volume on pathology or ex vivo MRI and correlation with neuronal density

GANTT

Publication Policy STEERING COMMITTEE (SC) This is made of: (i) the Principal Investigator (P.I.; G.B. Frisoni) (ii) the co-Principal Investigator (co-P.I.; C.R. Jack); (iii) the leader of the Statistical Working Group (S. Duchesne). The SC is chaired by the P.I. and deliberates by majority. STANDARD FORM for submission: TITLE of PROPOSAL: PI / CENTRE: AIM of the PROJECT: METHODS of the PROJECT : WHAT IS ASKED to the SC of the HARMONIZED HIPPOCAMPAL PROTOCOL WHAT IS OFFERED to the HARMONIZED HIPPOCAMPAL PROTOCOL PROJECT/COMMUNITY: “ ”