Rawaha Ahmad1,2, Andrey Postnov3,4, Guy Bormans5, Jan Versijpt6, Mathieu Vandenbulcke7, Koen Van Laere3,8. 1. Department of Imaging & Pathology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, KU Leuven and University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. Rawaha.ahmad@uzleuven.be. 2. Division of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Leuven, Herestraat 49 E901, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. Rawaha.ahmad@uzleuven.be. 3. Department of Imaging & Pathology, Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, KU Leuven and University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 4. National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, Moscow, Russia. 5. Laboratory for Radiopharmacy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 6. Department of Neurology, University Hospital Brussels, Brussels, Belgium. 7. Old Age Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, KU Leuven and University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 8. Division of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Leuven, Herestraat 49 E901, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The cannabinoid type 2 receptor (CB2R) is expressed by immune cells such as monocytes and macrophages. In the brain, CB2R is primarily found on microglia. CB2R upregulation has been reported in animal models of Alzheimer's disease, with a preferential localization near amyloid beta (Aβ) plaques, and in patients post mortem. We performed in vivo brain imaging and kinetic modelling of the CB2R tracer [11C]NE40 in healthy controls (HC) and in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) to investigate whether higher CB2R availability regionally colocalized to Aβ deposits is present in vivo. METHODS: Dynamic 90-min [11C]NE40 PET scans were performed in eight HC and nine AD patients with full kinetic modelling using arterial sampling and metabolite correction and partial volume correction. All AD patients received a static [11C]PIB scan 40 min after injection. In four HC, a retest scan with [11C]NE40 PET was performed within 9 weeks to investigate test-retest characteristics. RESULTS: [11C]NE40 was metabolized quickly leading to 50 % of intact tracer 20 min after injection and 20 % at 90 min. A two-tissue kinetic model fitted most of the time-activity curves best; both binding potential (BPND) and distribution volume (V T) parameters could be used. Brain uptake was generally low with an average K 1 value of 0.07 ml/min/ml tissue. V T and BPND were in the range of 0.7 - 1.8 and 0.6 - 1.6, respectively. Test values in HC were about 30 % for V T and BPND. AD patients showed overall significantly lower CB2R binding. No relationship was found between regional or global amyloid load and CB2R availability. CONCLUSION: Kinetic modelling of [11C]NE40 is possible with a two-tissue reversible model. In contrast to preclinical and post-mortem data, [11C]NE40 PET shows lower CB2R availability in vivo in AD patients, with no relationship to Aβ plaques. A possible explanation for these findings is that [11C]NE40 binds to CB2R with lower affinity and/or selectivity than to CB1R.
PURPOSE: The cannabinoid type 2 receptor (CB2R) is expressed by immune cells such as monocytes and macrophages. In the brain, CB2R is primarily found on microglia. CB2R upregulation has been reported in animal models of Alzheimer's disease, with a preferential localization near amyloid beta (Aβ) plaques, and in patients post mortem. We performed in vivo brain imaging and kinetic modelling of the CB2R tracer [11C]NE40 in healthy controls (HC) and in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) to investigate whether higher CB2R availability regionally colocalized to Aβ deposits is present in vivo. METHODS: Dynamic 90-min [11C]NE40 PET scans were performed in eight HC and nine ADpatients with full kinetic modelling using arterial sampling and metabolite correction and partial volume correction. All ADpatients received a static [11C]PIB scan 40 min after injection. In four HC, a retest scan with [11C]NE40 PET was performed within 9 weeks to investigate test-retest characteristics. RESULTS: [11C]NE40 was metabolized quickly leading to 50 % of intact tracer 20 min after injection and 20 % at 90 min. A two-tissue kinetic model fitted most of the time-activity curves best; both binding potential (BPND) and distribution volume (V T) parameters could be used. Brain uptake was generally low with an average K 1 value of 0.07 ml/min/ml tissue. V T and BPND were in the range of 0.7 - 1.8 and 0.6 - 1.6, respectively. Test values in HC were about 30 % for V T and BPND. ADpatients showed overall significantly lower CB2R binding. No relationship was found between regional or global amyloid load and CB2R availability. CONCLUSION: Kinetic modelling of [11C]NE40 is possible with a two-tissue reversible model. In contrast to preclinical and post-mortem data, [11C]NE40 PET shows lower CB2R availability in vivo in ADpatients, with no relationship to Aβ plaques. A possible explanation for these findings is that [11C]NE40 binds to CB2R with lower affinity and/or selectivity than to CB1R.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alzheimer’s disease; CB2R; Cannabinoid type 2 receptor; Neuroinflammation; PET imaging
Authors: David A Price; Alex A Martinez; Alexandre Seillier; Wouter Koek; Yolanda Acosta; Elizabeth Fernandez; Randy Strong; Beat Lutz; Giovanni Marsicano; James L Roberts; Andrea Giuffrida Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2009-05-21 Impact factor: 3.386
Authors: Nele Evens; Caroline Vandeputte; Charlotte Coolen; Peter Janssen; Raf Sciot; Veerle Baekelandt; Alfons M Verbruggen; Zeger Debyser; Koen Van Laere; Guy M Bormans Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2011-12-11 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: Emmanuel S Onaivi; Hiroki Ishiguro; Jian-Ping Gong; Sejal Patel; Alex Perchuk; Paul A Meozzi; Lester Myers; Zoila Mora; Patricia Tagliaferro; Eileen Gardner; Alicia Brusco; Babatunde E Akinshola; Qing-Rong Liu; Bruce Hope; Shinya Iwasaki; Tadao Arinami; Lindsey Teasenfitz; George R Uhl Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 5.691
Authors: Alie Schuitemaker; Marc A Kropholler; Ronald Boellaard; Wiesje M van der Flier; Reina W Kloet; Thalia F van der Doef; Dirk L Knol; Albert D Windhorst; Gert Luurtsema; Frederik Barkhof; Cees Jonker; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Philip Scheltens; Bart N M van Berckel Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2012-07-26 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Rawaha Ahmad; Karolien Goffin; Jan Van den Stock; François-Laurent De Winter; Evy Cleeren; Guy Bormans; Jos Tournoy; Philippe Persoons; Koen Van Laere; Mathieu Vandenbulcke Journal: Eur Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2013-10-17 Impact factor: 4.600
Authors: Michael T Heneka; Monica J Carson; Joseph El Khoury; Gary E Landreth; Frederic Brosseron; Douglas L Feinstein; Andreas H Jacobs; Tony Wyss-Coray; Javier Vitorica; Richard M Ransohoff; Karl Herrup; Sally A Frautschy; Bente Finsen; Guy C Brown; Alexei Verkhratsky; Koji Yamanaka; Jari Koistinaho; Eicke Latz; Annett Halle; Gabor C Petzold; Terrence Town; Dave Morgan; Mari L Shinohara; V Hugh Perry; Clive Holmes; Nicolas G Bazan; David J Brooks; Stéphane Hunot; Bertrand Joseph; Nikolaus Deigendesch; Olga Garaschuk; Erik Boddeke; Charles A Dinarello; John C Breitner; Greg M Cole; Douglas T Golenbock; Markus P Kummer Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Poorva Jain; Aisling M Chaney; Mackenzie L Carlson; Isaac M Jackson; Anoushka Rao; Michelle L James Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2020-07-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: M Collins Scott; Supinder S Bedi; Scott D Olson; Candice M Sears; Charles S Cox Journal: Expert Opin Ther Targets Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 6.902