| Literature DB >> 25530915 |
John Murray1, Wai H Tsui1, Yi Li1, Pauline McHugh1, Schantel Williams1, Megan Cummings1, Elizabeth Pirraglia1, Lilja Solnes2, Ricardo Osorio1, Lidia Glodzik1, Shankar Vallabhajosula2, Alexander Drzezga3, Satoshi Minoshima4, Mony J de Leon1, Lisa Mosconi1.
Abstract
Having a parent affected by late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major risk factor for cognitively normal (NL) individuals. This study explores the potential of PET with 18F-FDG and the amyloid- β (Aβ) tracer 11C-Pittsburgh Compound B (PiB) for detection of individual risk in NL adults with AD-parents.Entities:
Keywords: Alzheimer’s Disease; Amyloid Imaging; Early Detection; Glucose Metabolism; Normal Aging; Positron Emission Tomography
Year: 2014 PMID: 25530915 PMCID: PMC4270202 DOI: 10.4236/ami.2014.42003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv J Mol Imaging ISSN: 2161-6728
Figure 1Left panel: Representative FDG-PET patterns in NL individuals: (A, B) FDG−; (C, D) mild hypometabolism of PCC a/o parieto-temporal cortex; (E, F) moderate-to-severe hypmetabolism of PCC a/o parieto- temporal cortex. Right panel: Representative PiB-PET patterns in NL individuals: (A, B) PiB−; (C, D) mild PiB uptakein PCC a/o parieto-temporal cortex; (E, F) moderate-to-severe PiB uptake in PCC a/o parieto- temporal cortex. 3D-SSP maps showing tracer uptake deviations relative to norms are displayed on a color- coded scale and shown on the right and left lateral, superior and inferior, anterior and posterior, right and left medial views of a standardized brain image.
Demographic characteristics by family history group.
| Group | Age (y) | Gender (M/F) | Education (y) | MMSE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FH− | Total n = 39 | 57 (14) | 15/24 | 16 (3) | 29 (1) |
| Age <60 y, n = 21 | 47 (12) | 7/14 | 16 (2) | 29 (1) | |
| Age >60 y, n = 18 | 68 (5) | 8/10 | 16 (4) | 29 (2) | |
| FH+ | Total n = 80 | 58 (11) | 23/57 | 17 (2) | 29 (2) |
| FHp (n = 30) | 59 (10) | 11/19 | 17 (2) | 29 (1) | |
| FHm (n = 50) | 57 (11) | 12/38 | 17 (2) | 29 (2) | |
| Age <60 y, n = 46 | 51 (8) | 14/32 | 17 (2) | 29 (1) | |
| FHp (n = 18) | 52 (7) | 7/11 | 17 (2) | 29 (1) | |
| FHm (n = 28) | 49 (9) | 7/21 | 17 (2) | 29 (1) | |
| Age >60 y, n = 34 | 68 (4) | 9/25 | 17 (2) | 29 (2) | |
| FHp (n = 12) | 69 (5) | 4/8 | 17 (3) | 29 (2) | |
| FHm (n = 22) | 68 (4) | 5/17 | 18 (2) | 29 (2) |
Values are mean (standard deviation).
Figure 2PET abnormalities in NL FH+ vs. FH− individuals. Top panel: Percentage of FDG+, PiB+ and FDG+/PiB+ scans by age (A); family history status (B); and age by family history status (C); Bottom panel: Percentage of FDG and PiB scans showing absent, mild, or moderate-to-severe abnormalities by age (D); family history status (E), and age by family history status (F).
Figure 3PET abnormalities in NL FHm vs. FHp vs. FH−. Top panel: Percentage of FDG+, PiB+ and FDG+/PiB+ scans by parent-gender (A); age by parent-gender status (B); Bottom panel: Percentage of FDG and PiB scans showing absent, mild, or moderate-to-severe abnormalities by parent-gender (C); and age by parent-gender status (D).
Figure 4Three representative cases: (A) 50 y/o FH− with FDG−/PiB− scans; (B) 52 y/o FHm with FDG+/PiB− scans; (C) 65 y/o FHm with FDG+/PiB+ scans.