Chisa Hosokawa1, Kazunari Ishii2, Yuichi Kimura3, Tomoko Hyodo4, Makoto Hosono5, Kenta Sakaguchi6, Kimio Usami6, Kenji Shimamoto6, Yuzuru Yamazoe6, Takamichi Murakami5. 1. Department of Radiology, Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan Institute of Advanced Clinical Medicine, Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan ch4111@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology, Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan Neurocognitive Disorders Center, Kinki University Hospital, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan; and. 3. Kinki University Faculty of Biology-Oriented Science and Technology, Kinokawa, Wakayama, Japan. 4. Department of Radiology, Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan. 5. Department of Radiology, Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan Institute of Advanced Clinical Medicine, Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan. 6. Institute of Advanced Clinical Medicine, Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Osakasayama, Osaka, Japan.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The goal of this study was to clarify whether binding potential (BP) images using (11)C-Pittsburgh compound B ((11)C-PiB) and dynamic PET can reliably detect cortical amyloid deposits for patients whose (11)C-PiB PET static images are ambiguous and whether visual ratings are affected by white matter retention. METHODS: Static and BP images were constructed for 85 consecutive patients with cognitive impairment after (11)C-PiB dynamic PET. Cortical uptake was visually assessed as positive, negative, or equivocal for both types of images. Quantitatively, the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) from the static image, the nondisplaceable BP from the dynamic image for mean gray matter uptake, and the ratio of gray matter uptake to white matter retention were compared among (11)C-PiB-positive, (11)C-PiB-equivocal, and (11)C-PiB-negative groups. RESULTS: Forty-three scans were visually assessed as (11)C-PiB-positive in both the static and the BP images. Ten scans were (11)C-PiB-equivocal in the static images. In 8 of them, the BP images were (11)C-PiB-positive, whereas the other 2 were (11)C-PiB-equivocal. Thirty-two scans were assessed as (11)C-PiB-negative in the static images. In the BP images, 4 were (11)C-PiB-positive and 2 were (11)C-PiB-equivocal. The mean gray matter uptake of (11)C-PiB in SUVR and nondisplaceable BP, respectively, showed statistically significant differences among the (11)C-PiB-positive, (11)C-PiB-equivocal, and (11)C-PiB-negative groups. The ratio of gray matter uptake to white matter retention was lower in the BP images than static images from the (11)C-PiB-negative and (11)C-PiB-equivocal groups, whereas it was higher in the (11)C-PiB-positive group. CONCLUSION: (11)C-PiB PET BP images can clarify visual interpretation of clinical static (11)C-PiB-equivocal images by reducing the interference of nonspecific white matter retention. We conclude that (11)C-PiB-equivocal PET findings on static images reflect cortical amyloid deposits, which can be verified using BP images. Furthermore, quantitative assessments, such as SUVR and nondisplaceable BP, are of no use for correctly rating equivocal visual findings.
UNLABELLED: The goal of this study was to clarify whether binding potential (BP) images using (11)C-Pittsburgh compound B ((11)C-PiB) and dynamic PET can reliably detect cortical amyloid deposits for patients whose (11)C-PiB PET static images are ambiguous and whether visual ratings are affected by white matter retention. METHODS: Static and BP images were constructed for 85 consecutive patients with cognitive impairment after (11)C-PiB dynamic PET. Cortical uptake was visually assessed as positive, negative, or equivocal for both types of images. Quantitatively, the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) from the static image, the nondisplaceable BP from the dynamic image for mean gray matter uptake, and the ratio of gray matter uptake to white matter retention were compared among (11)C-PiB-positive, (11)C-PiB-equivocal, and (11)C-PiB-negative groups. RESULTS: Forty-three scans were visually assessed as (11)C-PiB-positive in both the static and the BP images. Ten scans were (11)C-PiB-equivocal in the static images. In 8 of them, the BP images were (11)C-PiB-positive, whereas the other 2 were (11)C-PiB-equivocal. Thirty-two scans were assessed as (11)C-PiB-negative in the static images. In the BP images, 4 were (11)C-PiB-positive and 2 were (11)C-PiB-equivocal. The mean gray matter uptake of (11)C-PiB in SUVR and nondisplaceable BP, respectively, showed statistically significant differences among the (11)C-PiB-positive, (11)C-PiB-equivocal, and (11)C-PiB-negative groups. The ratio of gray matter uptake to white matter retention was lower in the BP images than static images from the (11)C-PiB-negative and (11)C-PiB-equivocal groups, whereas it was higher in the (11)C-PiB-positive group. CONCLUSION: (11)C-PiB PET BP images can clarify visual interpretation of clinical static (11)C-PiB-equivocal images by reducing the interference of nonspecific white matter retention. We conclude that (11)C-PiB-equivocal PET findings on static images reflect cortical amyloid deposits, which can be verified using BP images. Furthermore, quantitative assessments, such as SUVR and nondisplaceable BP, are of no use for correctly rating equivocal visual findings.