UNLABELLED: Parametric imaging of serotonin transporters (SERT) with 11C-labeled 3-amino-4-(2-dimethylaminomethyl-phenylsulfanyl)benzonitrile ([11C]DASB) PET is a useful data analysis tool. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of measurements of SERT binding potential (BP) and relative blood flow (R1) by a 2-parameter multilinear reference tissue parametric imaging method (MRTM2) for human [11C]DASB studies. METHODS: Eight healthy subjects (3 men, 5 women; age, 26 +/- 9 y) underwent 2 [11C]DASB PET scans separated by 1 h on the same day (dose, 703 +/- 111 MBq). Parametric images of BP and R1 were generated by MRTM2 using the cerebellum as a reference region. The k'2 (clearance rate constant from the reference region) required by MRTM2 was estimated by the 3-parameter MRTM. Reproducibility of BP and R1 measurements was evaluated by calculating bias (100 x (retest - test/test), variability (SD of the bias), and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = rho) for several representative regions of interest (ROIs). BP and R1 were estimated for ROI time-activity curves fitted by MRTM2 and were compared with those based on the parametric images. RESULTS: The test-retest (0.066 +/- 0.013/0.06 +/- 0.011 min(-1)) MRTM k'2 reproducibility was excellent with small bias (3%) and variability (6%) and high reliability (0.95). Retest BP values were consistently lower than those of test BP values in all regions (a mean negative bias of approximately 6%; P < 0.001). The test-retest BP variability was relatively small, ranging from 4% to 13%, with rho ranging from 0.44 to 0.85. In contrast to BP, test-retest R1 values were similar with negligible bias of < or =0.1%. The test-retest R1 variability was excellent and smaller than that of BP ranging from 3% to 6%, with rho ranging from 0.58 to 0.95. BP and R1 values estimated by the ROI time-activity curve-fitting method were slightly lower ( approximately 3% and approximately 1%, respectively) than those by the parametric imaging method (P < 0.001). However, the test-retest bias and variability of BP and R1 were very similar for both ROI and parametric methods. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that [11C]DASB parametric imaging of BP and R1 with the noninvasive MRTM2 method is reproducible and reliable for PET studies of SERT.
UNLABELLED: Parametric imaging of serotonin transporters (SERT) with 11C-labeled 3-amino-4-(2-dimethylaminomethyl-phenylsulfanyl)benzonitrile ([11C]DASB) PET is a useful data analysis tool. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of measurements of SERT binding potential (BP) and relative blood flow (R1) by a 2-parameter multilinear reference tissue parametric imaging method (MRTM2) for human [11C]DASB studies. METHODS: Eight healthy subjects (3 men, 5 women; age, 26 +/- 9 y) underwent 2 [11C]DASB PET scans separated by 1 h on the same day (dose, 703 +/- 111 MBq). Parametric images of BP and R1 were generated by MRTM2 using the cerebellum as a reference region. The k'2 (clearance rate constant from the reference region) required by MRTM2 was estimated by the 3-parameter MRTM. Reproducibility of BP and R1 measurements was evaluated by calculating bias (100 x (retest - test/test), variability (SD of the bias), and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = rho) for several representative regions of interest (ROIs). BP and R1 were estimated for ROI time-activity curves fitted by MRTM2 and were compared with those based on the parametric images. RESULTS: The test-retest (0.066 +/- 0.013/0.06 +/- 0.011 min(-1)) MRTM k'2 reproducibility was excellent with small bias (3%) and variability (6%) and high reliability (0.95). Retest BP values were consistently lower than those of test BP values in all regions (a mean negative bias of approximately 6%; P < 0.001). The test-retest BP variability was relatively small, ranging from 4% to 13%, with rho ranging from 0.44 to 0.85. In contrast to BP, test-retest R1 values were similar with negligible bias of < or =0.1%. The test-retest R1 variability was excellent and smaller than that of BP ranging from 3% to 6%, with rho ranging from 0.58 to 0.95. BP and R1 values estimated by the ROI time-activity curve-fitting method were slightly lower ( approximately 3% and approximately 1%, respectively) than those by the parametric imaging method (P < 0.001). However, the test-retest bias and variability of BP and R1 were very similar for both ROI and parametric methods. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that [11C]DASB parametric imaging of BP and R1 with the noninvasive MRTM2 method is reproducible and reliable for PET studies of SERT.
Authors: Fumihiko Yasuno; Sandra M Sanabria; Donald Burns; Richard J Hargreaves; Subroto Ghose; Masanori Ichise; Frederick T Chin; Cheryl L Morse; Victor W Pike; Robert B Innis Journal: Synapse Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 2.562
Authors: Aybala Saricicek; Jason Chen; Beata Planeta; Barbara Ruf; Kalyani Subramanyam; Kathleen Maloney; David Matuskey; David Labaree; Lorenz Deserno; Alexander Neumeister; John H Krystal; Jean-Dominique Gallezot; Yiyun Huang; Richard E Carson; Zubin Bhagwagar Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-11-27 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Martin Nørgaard; Melanie Ganz; Claus Svarer; Vibe G Frokjaer; Douglas N Greve; Stephen C Strother; Gitte M Knudsen Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Christine DeLorenzo; Jean-Dominique Gallezot; John Gardus; Jie Yang; Beata Planeta; Nabeel Nabulsi; R Todd Ogden; David C Labaree; Yiyun H Huang; J John Mann; Fabrizio Gasparini; Xin Lin; Jonathan A Javitch; Ramin V Parsey; Richard E Carson; Irina Esterlis Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Masanori Ichise; Douglass C Vines; Tami Gura; George M Anderson; Stephen J Suomi; J Dee Higley; Robert B Innis Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2006-04-26 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Martin Nørgaard; Melanie Ganz; Claus Svarer; Vibe G Frokjaer; Douglas N Greve; Stephen C Strother; Gitte M Knudsen Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Vikram Adhikarla; Boadie W Dunlop; Nashwa Jarkas; Mark M Goodman; Helen Mayberg; Michael J Owens; Jonathon A Nye Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Robin Goland; Matthew Freeby; Ramin Parsey; Yoshifumi Saisho; Dileep Kumar; Norman Simpson; Joy Hirsch; Martin Prince; Antonella Maffei; J John Mann; Peter C Butler; Ronald Van Heertum; Rudolph L Leibel; Masanori Ichise; Paul E Harris Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-02-17 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Dima A Hammoud; Christopher J Endres; Edward Hammond; Ovsev Uzuner; Amanda Brown; Avindra Nath; Adam I Kaplin; Martin G Pomper Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2009-10-21 Impact factor: 6.556