CONTEXT: The ability to identify and quantify brain β-amyloid could increase the accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. OBJECTIVE: To determine if florbetapir F 18 positron emission tomographic (PET) imaging performed during life accurately predicts the presence of β-amyloid in the brain at autopsy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective clinical evaluation conducted February 2009 through March 2010 of florbetapir-PET imaging performed on 35 patients from hospice, long-term care, and community health care facilities near the end of their lives (6 patients to establish the protocol and 29 to validate) compared with immunohistochemistry and silver stain measures of brain β-amyloid after their death used as the reference standard. PET images were also obtained in 74 young individuals (18-50 years) presumed free of brain amyloid to better understand the frequency of a false-positive interpretation of a florbetapir-PET image. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Correlation of florbetapir-PET image interpretation (based on the median of 3 nuclear medicine physicians' ratings) and semiautomated quantification of cortical retention with postmortem β-amyloid burden, neuritic amyloid plaque density, and neuropathological diagnosis of Alzheimer disease in the first 35 participants autopsied (out of 152 individuals enrolled in the PET pathological correlation study). RESULTS: Florbetapir-PET imaging was performed a mean of 99 days (range, 1-377 days) before death for the 29 individuals in the primary analysis cohort. Fifteen of the 29 individuals (51.7%) met pathological criteria for Alzheimer disease. Both visual interpretation of the florbetapir-PET images and mean quantitative estimates of cortical uptake were correlated with presence and quantity of β-amyloid pathology at autopsy as measured by immunohistochemistry (Bonferroni ρ, 0.78 [95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.89]; P <.001]) and silver stain neuritic plaque score (Bonferroni ρ, 0.71 [95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.86]; P <.001). Florbetapir-PET images and postmortem results rated as positive or negative for β-amyloid agreed in 96% of the 29 individuals in the primary analysis cohort. The florbetapir-PET image was rated as amyloid negative in the 74 younger individuals in the nonautopsy cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Florbetapir-PET imaging was correlated with the presence and density of β-amyloid. These data provide evidence that a molecular imaging procedure can identify β-amyloid pathology in the brains of individuals during life. Additional studies are required to understand the appropriate use of florbetapir-PET imaging in the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer disease and for the prediction of progression to dementia.
CONTEXT: The ability to identify and quantify brain β-amyloid could increase the accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. OBJECTIVE: To determine if florbetapir F 18 positron emission tomographic (PET) imaging performed during life accurately predicts the presence of β-amyloid in the brain at autopsy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective clinical evaluation conducted February 2009 through March 2010 of florbetapir-PET imaging performed on 35 patients from hospice, long-term care, and community health care facilities near the end of their lives (6 patients to establish the protocol and 29 to validate) compared with immunohistochemistry and silver stain measures of brain β-amyloid after their death used as the reference standard. PET images were also obtained in 74 young individuals (18-50 years) presumed free of brain amyloid to better understand the frequency of a false-positive interpretation of a florbetapir-PET image. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Correlation of florbetapir-PET image interpretation (based on the median of 3 nuclear medicine physicians' ratings) and semiautomated quantification of cortical retention with postmortem β-amyloid burden, neuritic amyloid plaque density, and neuropathological diagnosis of Alzheimer disease in the first 35 participants autopsied (out of 152 individuals enrolled in the PET pathological correlation study). RESULTS:Florbetapir-PET imaging was performed a mean of 99 days (range, 1-377 days) before death for the 29 individuals in the primary analysis cohort. Fifteen of the 29 individuals (51.7%) met pathological criteria for Alzheimer disease. Both visual interpretation of the florbetapir-PET images and mean quantitative estimates of cortical uptake were correlated with presence and quantity of β-amyloid pathology at autopsy as measured by immunohistochemistry (Bonferroni ρ, 0.78 [95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.89]; P <.001]) and silver stain neuritic plaque score (Bonferroni ρ, 0.71 [95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.86]; P <.001). Florbetapir-PET images and postmortem results rated as positive or negative for β-amyloid agreed in 96% of the 29 individuals in the primary analysis cohort. The florbetapir-PET image was rated as amyloid negative in the 74 younger individuals in the nonautopsy cohort. CONCLUSIONS:Florbetapir-PET imaging was correlated with the presence and density of β-amyloid. These data provide evidence that a molecular imaging procedure can identify β-amyloid pathology in the brains of individuals during life. Additional studies are required to understand the appropriate use of florbetapir-PET imaging in the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer disease and for the prediction of progression to dementia.
Authors: William J Jagust; Dan Bandy; Kewei Chen; Norman L Foster; Susan M Landau; Chester A Mathis; Julie C Price; Eric M Reiman; Daniel Skovronsky; Robert A Koeppe Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Leon J Thal; Kejal Kantarci; Eric M Reiman; William E Klunk; Michael W Weiner; Henrik Zetterberg; Douglas Galasko; Domenico Praticò; Sue Griffin; Dale Schenk; Eric Siemers Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2006 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Christopher C Rowe; Kathryn A Ellis; Miroslava Rimajova; Pierrick Bourgeat; Kerryn E Pike; Gareth Jones; Jurgen Fripp; Henri Tochon-Danguy; Laurence Morandeau; Graeme O'Keefe; Roger Price; Parnesh Raniga; Peter Robins; Oscar Acosta; Nat Lenzo; Cassandra Szoeke; Olivier Salvado; Richard Head; Ralph Martins; Colin L Masters; David Ames; Victor L Villemagne Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2010-05-15 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: C M Hulette; K A Welsh-Bohmer; M G Murray; A M Saunders; D C Mash; L M McIntyre Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 1998-12 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: R Mayeux; A M Saunders; S Shea; S Mirra; D Evans; A D Roses; B T Hyman; B Crain; M X Tang; C H Phelps Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1998-02-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Clifford R Jack; David S Knopman; William J Jagust; Leslie M Shaw; Paul S Aisen; Michael W Weiner; Ronald C Petersen; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Christopher C Rowe; Uwe Ackerman; William Browne; Rachel Mulligan; Kerryn L Pike; Graeme O'Keefe; Henry Tochon-Danguy; Gordon Chan; Salvatore U Berlangieri; Gareth Jones; Kerryn L Dickinson-Rowe; Hank P Kung; Wei Zhang; Mei Ping Kung; Daniel Skovronsky; Thomas Dyrks; Gerhard Holl; Sabine Krause; Matthias Friebe; Lutz Lehman; Stefanie Lindemann; Ludger M Dinkelborg; Colin L Masters; Victor L Villemagne Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2008-01-10 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Wai Lam Yip; Sverre Arne Sande; David Grace; Dirk Jan in't Veld; Per Christian Sontum; Tina Solvang; Knut Dyrstad Journal: Pharm Res Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 4.200
Authors: John L Robinson; Felix Geser; Maria M Corrada; Daniel J Berlau; Steven E Arnold; Virginia M-Y Lee; Claudia H Kawas; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Brain Date: 2011-11-26 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: K M Rodrigue; K M Kennedy; M D Devous; J R Rieck; A C Hebrank; R Diaz-Arrastia; D Mathews; D C Park Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Christopher Breault; Jonathan Piper; Abhinay D Joshi; Sara D Pirozzi; Aaron S Nelson; Ming Lu; Michael J Pontecorvo; Mark A Mintun; Michael D Devous Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-07-15
Authors: Ross W Paterson; Jamie Toombs; Catherine F Slattery; Jonathan M Schott; Henrik Zetterberg Journal: Mol Diagn Ther Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 4.074
Authors: Jonathan S Wall; Tina Richey; Sally Macy; Eric Heidel; Craig Wooliver; Stephen J Kennel Journal: Amyloid Date: 2013-01-17 Impact factor: 7.141