PURPOSE: [(18)F]FPEB is a promising PET radioligand for the metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5), a potential target for the treatment of neuropsychiatric diseases. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the test-retest reproducibility of [(18)F]FPEB in the human brain. METHODS: Seven healthy male subjects were scanned twice, 3 - 11 weeks apart. Dynamic data were acquired using bolus plus infusion of 162 ± 32 MBq [(18)F]FPEB. Four methods were used to estimate volume of distribution (V T): equilibrium analysis (EQ) using arterial (EQA) or venous input data (EQV), MA1, and a two-tissue compartment model (2 T). Binding potential (BP ND) was also estimated using cerebellar white matter (CWM) or gray matter (CGM) as the reference region using EQ, 2 T and MA1. Absolute test-retest variability (aTRV) of V T and BP ND were calculated for each method. Venous blood measurements (C V) were compared with arterial input (C A) to examine their usability in EQ analysis. RESULTS: Regional V T estimated by the four methods displayed a high degree of agreement (r (2) ranging from 0.83 to 0.99 among the methods), although EQA and EQV overestimated V T by a mean of 9 % and 7 %, respectively, compared to 2 T. Mean values of aTRV of V T were 11 % by EQA, 12 % by EQV, 14 % by MA1 and 14 % by 2 T. Regional BP ND also agreed well among the methods and mean aTRV of BP ND was 8 - 12 % (CWM) and 7 - 9 % (CGM). Venous and arterial blood concentrations of [(18)F]FPEB were well matched during equilibrium (C V = 1.01 · C A, r (2) = 0.95). CONCLUSION: [(18)F]FPEB binding shows good TRV with minor differences among analysis methods. Venous blood can be used as an alternative for input function measurement instead of arterial blood in EQ analysis. Thus, [(18)F]FPEB is an excellent PET imaging tracer for mGluR5 in humans.
PURPOSE: [(18)F]FPEB is a promising PET radioligand for the metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5), a potential target for the treatment of neuropsychiatric diseases. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the test-retest reproducibility of [(18)F]FPEB in the human brain. METHODS: Seven healthy male subjects were scanned twice, 3 - 11 weeks apart. Dynamic data were acquired using bolus plus infusion of 162 ± 32 MBq [(18)F]FPEB. Four methods were used to estimate volume of distribution (V T): equilibrium analysis (EQ) using arterial (EQA) or venous input data (EQV), MA1, and a two-tissue compartment model (2 T). Binding potential (BP ND) was also estimated using cerebellar white matter (CWM) or gray matter (CGM) as the reference region using EQ, 2 T and MA1. Absolute test-retest variability (aTRV) of V T and BP ND were calculated for each method. Venous blood measurements (C V) were compared with arterial input (C A) to examine their usability in EQ analysis. RESULTS: Regional V T estimated by the four methods displayed a high degree of agreement (r (2) ranging from 0.83 to 0.99 among the methods), although EQA and EQV overestimated V T by a mean of 9 % and 7 %, respectively, compared to 2 T. Mean values of aTRV of V T were 11 % by EQA, 12 % by EQV, 14 % by MA1 and 14 % by 2 T. Regional BP ND also agreed well among the methods and mean aTRV of BP ND was 8 - 12 % (CWM) and 7 - 9 % (CGM). Venous and arterial blood concentrations of [(18)F]FPEB were well matched during equilibrium (C V = 1.01 · C A, r (2) = 0.95). CONCLUSION: [(18)F]FPEB binding shows good TRV with minor differences among analysis methods. Venous blood can be used as an alternative for input function measurement instead of arterial blood in EQ analysis. Thus, [(18)F]FPEB is an excellent PET imaging tracer for mGluR5 in humans.
Authors: Christine DeLorenzo; Matthew S Milak; Kathleen G Brennan; J S Dileep Kumar; J John Mann; Ramin V Parsey Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-01-29 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Diana Martinez; Mark Slifstein; Nabeel Nabulsi; Alexander Grassetti; Nina B L Urban; Audrey Perez; Fei Liu; Shu-Fei Lin; Jim Ropchan; Xiangling Mao; Lawrence S Kegeles; Dikoma C Shungu; Richard E Carson; Yiyun Huang Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2013-09-12 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Sophie E Holmes; Matthew J Girgenti; Margaret T Davis; Robert H Pietrzak; Nicole DellaGioia; Nabeel Nabulsi; David Matuskey; Steven Southwick; Ronald S Duman; Richard E Carson; John H Krystal; Irina Esterlis Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2017-07-17 Impact factor: 11.205
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: Sophie E Holmes; Jean-Dominique Gallezot; Margaret T Davis; Nicole DellaGioia; David Matuskey; Nabeel Nabulsi; John H Krystal; Jonathan A Javitch; Christine DeLorenzo; Richard E Carson; Irina Esterlis Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2019-11-19 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Chadi G Abdallah; Jonas Hannestad; Graeme F Mason; Sophie E Holmes; Nicole DellaGioia; Gerard Sanacora; Lihong Jiang; David Matuskey; Ritvij Satodiya; Fabrizio Gasparini; Xin Lin; Jonathan Javitch; Beata Planeta; Nabeel Nabulsi; Richard E Carson; Irina Esterlis Journal: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging Date: 2017-04-06
Authors: Jenny Ceccarini; Gil Leurquin-Sterk; Cleo Lina Crunelle; Bart de Laat; Guy Bormans; Hendrik Peuskens; Koen Van Laere Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Stephanie M Groman; Ansel T Hillmer; Heather Liu; Krista Fowles; Daniel Holden; Evan D Morris; Daeyeol Lee; Jane R Taylor Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Ansel T Hillmer; Gustavo A Angarita; Irina Esterlis; Jon Mikael Anderson; Nabeel Nabulsi; Keunpoong Lim; Jim Ropchan; Richard E Carson; John H Krystal; Stephanie S O' Malley; Kelly P Cosgrove Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2020-09-12 Impact factor: 7.853