Reliability of Automated Amyloid PET Quantification: Real-World Validation of Commercial Tools Against Centiloid Project Method

Background: Despite the growing demand for amyloid PET quantification, practical challenges remain. As automated software platforms are increasingly adopted to address these limitations, we evaluated the reliability of commercial tools for Centiloid quantification against the original Centiloid Project method. Methods: This retrospective study included 332 amyloid PET scans (165 [¹⁸F]Florbetaben; 167 [¹⁸F]Flutemetamol) performed for suspected mild cognitive impairments or dementia, paired with T1-weighted MRI within one year. Centiloid values were calculated using three automated software platforms, BTXBrain, MIMneuro, and SCALE PET, and compared with the original Centiloid method. The agreement was assessed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), a Passing–Bablok regression, and Bland–Altman plots. The concordance with the visual interpretation was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: BTXBrain (R = 0.993; ICC = 0.986) and SCALE PET (R = 0.992; ICC = 0.991) demonstrated an excellent correlation with the reference, while MIMneuro showed a slightly lower agreement (R = 0.974; ICC = 0.966). BTXBrain exhibited a proportional underestimation (slope = 0.872 [0.860–0.885]), MIMneuro showed a significant overestimation (slope = 1.053 [1.026–1.081]), and SCALE PET demonstrated a minimal bias (slope = 1.014 [0.999–1.029]). The bias pattern was particularly noted for FMM. All platforms maintained their trends for correlations and biases when focusing on subthreshold-to-low-positive ranges (0–50 Centiloid units). However, all platforms showed an excellent agreement with the visual interpretation (areas under ROC curves > 0.996 for all). Conclusions: Three automated platforms demonstrated an acceptable reliability for Centiloid quantification, although software-specific biases were observed. These differences did not impair their feasibility in aiding the image interpretation, as supported by the concordance with visual readings. Nevertheless, users should recognize the platform-specific characteristics when applying diagnostic thresholds or interpreting longitudinal changes.