Karmen K Yoder1, Chunzhi Wang, Evan D Morris. 1. Department of Radiology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA. kkyoder@iupui.edu
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Change in binding potential (deltaBP) is often used to indicate alterations in neurotransmitter concentration in response to stimuli. Increasingly, it is being used in bolus studies as a quantitative index of dopamine (DA) release. In bolus studies, however, BP is an average quantity over time that is influenced by the dynamics of both the tracer and the neurotransmitter. We sought to characterize the sensitivity of deltaBP to changes in endogenous DA concentration and to elucidate possible biases in deltaBP with respect to timing of task-induced or drug-induced increases in DA. METHODS: Noiseless simulations of (11)C-raclopride PET curves were performed in a specific binding region with concomitant increases in endogenous DA. DA changes were modeled as delta-functions, gamma-variates, or as realistic drug-induced increases in DA over time, based on published results. Graphical estimation of BP with a reference region as the input function was used, with a multilinear formulation of the operational equation. RESULTS: Simulations demonstrated that deltaBP (a). is linear over a narrow range of integrated DA release, (b). has an inherent sensitivity to timing of DA perturbations, and (c). could incorrectly infer the relative amounts of DA released between subject populations or experimental conditions. These results are explained by what we term the effective weighted availability, which describes the interaction of a DA function and free raclopride concentration over time and follows directly from earlier work. CONCLUSION: We illustrate how, under quite plausible circumstances, deltaBP may lead to erroneous conclusions about relative amounts of DA released after dopaminergic perturbations. Our findings caution against using deltaBP as a quantitative or rank index of DA release when comparing different dopaminergic stimuli.
UNLABELLED: Change in binding potential (deltaBP) is often used to indicate alterations in neurotransmitter concentration in response to stimuli. Increasingly, it is being used in bolus studies as a quantitative index of dopamine (DA) release. In bolus studies, however, BP is an average quantity over time that is influenced by the dynamics of both the tracer and the neurotransmitter. We sought to characterize the sensitivity of deltaBP to changes in endogenous DA concentration and to elucidate possible biases in deltaBP with respect to timing of task-induced or drug-induced increases in DA. METHODS: Noiseless simulations of (11)C-raclopride PET curves were performed in a specific binding region with concomitant increases in endogenous DA. DA changes were modeled as delta-functions, gamma-variates, or as realistic drug-induced increases in DA over time, based on published results. Graphical estimation of BP with a reference region as the input function was used, with a multilinear formulation of the operational equation. RESULTS: Simulations demonstrated that deltaBP (a). is linear over a narrow range of integrated DA release, (b). has an inherent sensitivity to timing of DA perturbations, and (c). could incorrectly infer the relative amounts of DA released between subject populations or experimental conditions. These results are explained by what we term the effective weighted availability, which describes the interaction of a DA function and free raclopride concentration over time and follows directly from earlier work. CONCLUSION: We illustrate how, under quite plausible circumstances, deltaBP may lead to erroneous conclusions about relative amounts of DA released after dopaminergic perturbations. Our findings caution against using deltaBP as a quantitative or rank index of DA release when comparing different dopaminergic stimuli.
Authors: Simon Kaller; Michael Rullmann; Marianne Patt; Georg-Alexander Becker; Julia Luthardt; Johanna Girbardt; Philipp M Meyer; Peter Werner; Henryk Barthel; Anke Bresch; Thomas H Fritz; Swen Hesse; Osama Sabri Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-02-14 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Sargo Aalto; Kimmo Ingman; Kati Alakurtti; Valtteri Kaasinen; Jussi Virkkala; Kjell Någren; Juha O Rinne; Harry Scheinin Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2014-12-10 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Brandon G Oberlin; Mario Dzemidzic; Stella M Tran; Christina M Soeurt; Daniel S Albrecht; Karmen K Yoder; David A Kareken Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2013-04-15 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Alice Egerton; Mitul A Mehta; Andrew J Montgomery; Julia M Lappin; Oliver D Howes; Suzanne J Reeves; Vincent J Cunningham; Paul M Grasby Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2009-05-27 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: Karmen K Yoder; Evan D Morris; Cristian C Constantinescu; Tee-Ean Cheng; Marc D Normandin; Sean J O'Connor; David A Kareken Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2008-10-31 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Johan Lataster; Dina Collip; Jenny Ceccarini; Dennis Hernaus; David Haas; Linda Booij; Jim van Os; Jens Pruessner; Koen Van Laere; Inez Myin-Germeys Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2013-01-30 Impact factor: 9.306