Literature DB >> 16330558

Simplified quantification of Pittsburgh Compound B amyloid imaging PET studies: a comparative analysis.

Brian J Lopresti1, William E Klunk, Chester A Mathis, Jessica A Hoge, Scott K Ziolko, Xueling Lu, Carolyn C Meltzer, Kurt Schimmel, Nicholas D Tsopelas, Steven T DeKosky, Julie C Price.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: PET studies have been performed using the amyloid binding radiotracer Pittsburgh Compound B (PIB). Previous quantitative analyses using arterial blood showed that the Logan graphical analysis using 90 min of emission data (ART90) provided a reliable measure of PIB retention. This work reports on simplified methods of analysis for human PIB imaging.
METHODS: PIB PET scans were conducted in 24 subjects (6 Alzheimer's disease [AD], 10 mild cognitive impairment [MCI], 8 controls) with arterial blood sampling. Retest scans were performed on 8 subjects (3 AD, 1 MCI, 4 controls) within 28 d. Data were analyzed over 60 and 90 min using the Logan analysis and (a) metabolite-corrected input functions based on arterial plasma (ART60, ART90), (b) carotid artery time-activity data with a population average metabolite correction (CAR60, CAR90); and (c) cerebellar reference tissue (CER60, CER90). Data also were analyzed using the simplified reference tissue method (SRTM60, SRTM90) and a single-scan method based on late-scan ratios of standardized uptake values (SUVR60, SUVR90).
RESULTS: All methods of analysis examined effectively discerned regional differences between AD and control subjects in amyloid-laden cortical regions, although the performance of the simplified methods varied in terms of bias, test-retest variability, intersubject variability, and effect size. CAR90 best agreed with ART90 distribution volume ratio (DVR) measures across brain regions and subject groups and demonstrated satisfactory test-retest variability (+/-7.1% across regions). CER90 and CER60 showed negative biases relative to ART90 in high-DVR subjects but had the lowest test-retest variability. The single-scan SUV-based methods showed the largest effect sizes for AD and control group differences and performed well in terms of intersubject and test-retest variability.
CONCLUSION: Of the simplified methods for PIB analysis examined, CAR90 provided DVR measures that were most comparable to ART90; CER90 was the most reproducible and SUVR90 produced the largest effect size. All simplified methods were effective at distinguishing AD and control differences and may be effectively used in the analysis of PIB. SUVR60 data can be obtained with as little as 20 min of PET emission data collection. The relative strengths and limitations of each method must be considered for each experimental design.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16330558

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  236 in total

Review 1.  Amyloid imaging as a biomarker for cerebral β-amyloidosis and risk prediction for Alzheimer dementia.

Authors:  William E Klunk
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.673

Review 2.  Molecular brain imaging in the multimodality era.

Authors:  Julie C Price
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 6.200

3.  Improved kinetic analysis of dynamic PET data with optimized HYPR-LR.

Authors:  John M Floberg; Charles A Mistretta; Jamey P Weichert; Lance T Hall; James E Holden; Bradley T Christian
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Pittsburgh compound B (11C-PIB) and fluorodeoxyglucose (18 F-FDG) PET in patients with Alzheimer disease, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy controls.

Authors:  D P Devanand; Arthur Mikhno; Gregory H Pelton; Katrina Cuasay; Gnanavalli Pradhaban; J S Dileep Kumar; Neil Upton; Robert Lai; Roger N Gunn; V Libri; Xinhua Liu; Ronald van Heertum; J John Mann; Ramin V Parsey
Journal:  J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 2.680

5.  Alzheimer's disease phenotypes and genotypes associated with mutations in presenilin 2.

Authors:  Suman Jayadev; James B Leverenz; Ellen Steinbart; Justin Stahl; William Klunk; Cheng-En Yu; Thomas D Bird
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 13.501

6.  Increased fibrillar amyloid-{beta} burden in normal individuals with a family history of late-onset Alzheimer's.

Authors:  Lisa Mosconi; Juha O Rinne; Wai H Tsui; Valentina Berti; Yi Li; Huiyu Wang; John Murray; Noora Scheinin; Kjell Någren; Schantel Williams; Lidia Glodzik; Susan De Santi; Shankar Vallabhajosula; Mony J de Leon
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-03-15       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Inter-rater reliability of manual and automated region-of-interest delineation for PiB PET.

Authors:  Bedda L Rosario; Lisa A Weissfeld; Charles M Laymon; Chester A Mathis; William E Klunk; Michael D Berginc; Jeffrey A James; Jessica A Hoge; Julie C Price
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-12-31       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Comparison of dual-biomarker PIB-PET and dual-tracer PET in AD diagnosis.

Authors:  Liping Fu; Linwen Liu; Jinming Zhang; Baixuan Xu; Yong Fan; Jiahe Tian
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  Role of HIV in amyloid metabolism.

Authors:  Mario Ortega; Beau M Ances
Journal:  J Neuroimmune Pharmacol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Partial volume correction in quantitative amyloid imaging.

Authors:  Yi Su; Tyler M Blazey; Abraham Z Snyder; Marcus E Raichle; Daniel S Marcus; Beau M Ances; Randall J Bateman; Nigel J Cairns; Patricia Aldea; Lisa Cash; Jon J Christensen; Karl Friedrichsen; Russ C Hornbeck; Angela M Farrar; Christopher J Owen; Richard Mayeux; Adam M Brickman; William Klunk; Julie C Price; Paul M Thompson; Bernadino Ghetti; Andrew J Saykin; Reisa A Sperling; Keith A Johnson; Peter R Schofield; Virginia Buckles; John C Morris; Tammie L S Benzinger
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 6.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.