INTRODUCTION: Advances in positron emission tomography (PET) imaging have provided opportunities to develop radiotracers specific for imaging insulin-producing pancreatic β-cells. However, a host of lingering questions should be addressed before these radiotracers are advocated for noninvasive quantification of β-cell mass (BCM) in vivo in the native pancreas. METHOD: We provide an overview of tetrabenazine-based PET tracers developed to image and quantify BCM and discuss several theoretical, technical, and biological limitations of applying these tracers in clinical practice. DISCUSSION: VMAT2, a transporter protein expressed on pancreatic β-cells, has been advocated as a promising target for PET imaging tracers, such as dihydrotetrabenazine. However, the lack of radiotracer specificity for these proteins hampers their clinical application. Another important argument against their use is a striking discrepancy between radiotracer uptake and BCM in subjects with type I diabetes mellitus and healthy controls. Additionally, technical issues, such as the finite spatial resolution of PET, partial volume effects, and movement of the pancreas during respiration, impede PET imaging as a viable option for BCM quantification in the foreseeable future. CONCLUSION: The assertion that BCM can be accurately quantified by tetrabenazine derived β-cell-specific radiotracers as density per unit volume of pancreatic tissue is not justifiable at this time. The fallacy of these claims can be explained by technical as well as biological facts that have been disregarded and ignored in the literature.
INTRODUCTION: Advances in positron emission tomography (PET) imaging have provided opportunities to develop radiotracers specific for imaging insulin-producing pancreatic β-cells. However, a host of lingering questions should be addressed before these radiotracers are advocated for noninvasive quantification of β-cell mass (BCM) in vivo in the native pancreas. METHOD: We provide an overview of tetrabenazine-based PET tracers developed to image and quantify BCM and discuss several theoretical, technical, and biological limitations of applying these tracers in clinical practice. DISCUSSION: VMAT2, a transporter protein expressed on pancreatic β-cells, has been advocated as a promising target for PET imaging tracers, such as dihydrotetrabenazine. However, the lack of radiotracer specificity for these proteins hampers their clinical application. Another important argument against their use is a striking discrepancy between radiotracer uptake and BCM in subjects with type I diabetes mellitus and healthy controls. Additionally, technical issues, such as the finite spatial resolution of PET, partial volume effects, and movement of the pancreas during respiration, impede PET imaging as a viable option for BCM quantification in the foreseeable future. CONCLUSION: The assertion that BCM can be accurately quantified by tetrabenazine derived β-cell-specific radiotracers as density per unit volume of pancreatic tissue is not justifiable at this time. The fallacy of these claims can be explained by technical as well as biological facts that have been disregarded and ignored in the literature.
Authors: Olof Eriksson; Mahabuba Jahan; Peter Johnström; Olle Korsgren; Anders Sundin; Christer Halldin; Lars Johansson Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2010-01-15 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: Gary W Cline; Xiaojian Zhao; Amy B Jakowski; Walter C Soeller; Judith L Treadway Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 2011-07-28 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Olga T Hardy; Miguel Hernandez-Pampaloni; Janet R Saffer; Joshua S Scheuermann; Linda M Ernst; Richard Freifelder; Hongming Zhuang; Courtney MacMullen; Susan Becker; N Scott Adzick; Chaitanya Divgi; Abass Alavi; Charles A Stanley Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2007-09-25 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Yoshifumi Saisho; Paul E Harris; Alexandra E Butler; Ryan Galasso; Tatyana Gurlo; Robert A Rizza; Peter C Butler Journal: J Mol Histol Date: 2008-09-13 Impact factor: 2.611
Authors: Hank F Kung; Brian P Lieberman; Zhi-Ping Zhuang; Shunichi Oya; Mei-Ping Kung; Seok Rye Choi; Karl Poessl; Eric Blankemeyer; Catherine Hou; Daniel Skovronsky; Michael Kilbourn Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: Marc D Normandin; Kitt F Petersen; Yu-Shin Ding; Shu-Fei Lin; Sarita Naik; Krista Fowles; Daniel M Skovronsky; Kevan C Herold; Timothy J McCarthy; Roberto A Calle; Richard E Carson; Judith L Treadway; Gary W Cline Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2012-05-09 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Nilantha Bandara; Alex Zheleznyak; Kaavya Cherukuri; David A Griffith; Chris Limberakis; David A Tess; Chen Jianqing; Rikki Waterhouse; Suzanne E Lapi Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Julie Bendix; Mette G Laursen; Michael B Mortensen; Maria Melikian; Evgenia Globa; Sönke Detlefsen; Lars Rasmussen; Henrik Petersen; Klaus Brusgaard; Henrik T Christesen Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2018-08-22 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: Jian-She Zhu; Kyle M Stiers; Sherany M Winter; Anthony D Garcia; Antoine F Versini; Lesa J Beamer; David L Jakeman Journal: ACS Omega Date: 2019-04-18
Authors: Christina H Liu; Antonio Sastre; Richard Conroy; Belinda Seto; Roderic I Pettigrew Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Veronica Clavijo Jordan; Catherine D G Hines; Liza T Gantert; Shubing Wang; Stacey Conarello; Christian Preihs; Sara Chirayil; Michael Klimas; Jeffrey L Evelhoch; A Dean Sherry Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 5.555