PURPOSE: In recent years, several [18F]-labeled amyloid-PET tracers have been developed and have obtained clinical approval. Despite their widespread scientific use, studies in routine clinical settings are limited. We therefore investigated the impact of [18F]-florbetaben (FBB)-PET on the diagnostic management of patients with suspected dementia that was still unclarified after [18F]-fluordeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET. METHODS: All subjects were referred in-house with a suspected dementia syndrome due to neurodegenerative disease. After undergoing an FDG-PET exam, the cases were discussed by the interdisciplinary dementia board, where the most likely diagnosis as well as potential differential diagnoses were documented. Because of persistent diagnostic uncertainty, the patients received an additional FBB-PET exam. Results were interpreted visually and classified as amyloid-positive or amyloid-negative, and we then compared the individual clinical diagnoses before and after additional FBB-PET. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients (mean age 69.4 ± 9.7y) were included in the study. The FBB-PET was rated as amyloid-positive in 65/107. In 83% of the formerly unclear cases, a final diagnosis was reached through FBB-PET, and the most likely prior diagnosis was changed in 28% of cases. The highest impact was observed for distinguishing Alzheimer's dementia (AD) from fronto-temporal dementia (FTLD), where FBB-PET altered the most likely diagnosis in 41% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: FBB-PET has a high additive value in establishing a final diagnosis in suspected dementia cases when prior investigations such as FDG-PET are inconclusive. The differentiation between AD and FTLD was particularly facilitated by amyloid-PET, predicting a considerable impact on patient management, especially in the light of upcoming disease-modifying therapies.
PURPOSE: In recent years, several [18F]-labeled amyloid-PET tracers have been developed and have obtained clinical approval. Despite their widespread scientific use, studies in routine clinical settings are limited. We therefore investigated the impact of [18F]-florbetaben (FBB)-PET on the diagnostic management of patients with suspected dementia that was still unclarified after [18F]-fluordeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET. METHODS: All subjects were referred in-house with a suspected dementia syndrome due to neurodegenerative disease. After undergoing an FDG-PET exam, the cases were discussed by the interdisciplinary dementia board, where the most likely diagnosis as well as potential differential diagnoses were documented. Because of persistent diagnostic uncertainty, the patients received an additional FBB-PET exam. Results were interpreted visually and classified as amyloid-positive or amyloid-negative, and we then compared the individual clinical diagnoses before and after additional FBB-PET. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients (mean age 69.4 ± 9.7y) were included in the study. The FBB-PET was rated as amyloid-positive in 65/107. In 83% of the formerly unclear cases, a final diagnosis was reached through FBB-PET, and the most likely prior diagnosis was changed in 28% of cases. The highest impact was observed for distinguishing Alzheimer's dementia (AD) from fronto-temporal dementia (FTLD), where FBB-PET altered the most likely diagnosis in 41% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: FBB-PET has a high additive value in establishing a final diagnosis in suspected dementia cases when prior investigations such as FDG-PET are inconclusive. The differentiation between AD and FTLD was particularly facilitated by amyloid-PET, predicting a considerable impact on patient management, especially in the light of upcoming disease-modifying therapies.
Authors: M L Gorno-Tempini; A E Hillis; S Weintraub; A Kertesz; M Mendez; S F Cappa; J M Ogar; J D Rohrer; S Black; B F Boeve; F Manes; N F Dronkers; R Vandenberghe; K Rascovsky; K Patterson; B L Miller; D S Knopman; J R Hodges; M M Mesulam; M Grossman Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-02-16 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Osama Sabri; Marwan N Sabbagh; John Seibyl; Henryk Barthel; Hiroyasu Akatsu; Yasuomi Ouchi; Kohei Senda; Shigeo Murayama; Kenji Ishii; Masaki Takao; Thomas G Beach; Christopher C Rowe; James B Leverenz; Bernardino Ghetti; James W Ironside; Ana M Catafau; Andrew W Stephens; Andre Mueller; Norman Koglin; Anja Hoffmann; Katrin Roth; Cornelia Reininger; Walter J Schulz-Schaeffer Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2015-03-28 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Satoshi Minoshima; Alexander E Drzezga; Henryk Barthel; Nicolaas Bohnen; Mehdi Djekidel; David H Lewis; Chester A Mathis; Jonathan McConathy; Agneta Nordberg; Osama Sabri; John P Seibyl; Margaret K Stokes; Koen Van Laere Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Norman L Foster; Judith L Heidebrink; Christopher M Clark; William J Jagust; Steven E Arnold; Nancy R Barbas; Charles S DeCarli; R Scott Turner; Robert A Koeppe; Roger Higdon; Satoshi Minoshima Journal: Brain Date: 2007-08-18 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Piotr Lewczuk; Anja Matzen; Kaj Blennow; Lucilla Parnetti; Jose Luis Molinuevo; Paolo Eusebi; Johannes Kornhuber; John C Morris; Anne M Fagan Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2017 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Sonja Daerr; Matthias Brendel; Christian Zach; Erik Mille; Dorothee Schilling; Mathias Johannes Zacherl; Katharina Bürger; Adrian Danek; Oliver Pogarell; Andreas Schildan; Marianne Patt; Henryk Barthel; Osama Sabri; Peter Bartenstein; Axel Rominger Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2016-10-08 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Sonja Schönecker; Matthias Brendel; Marion Huber; Christian Vollmar; Hans-Juergen Huppertz; Stefan Teipel; Nobuyuki Okamura; Johannes Levin; Axel Rominger; Adrian Danek Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2016-08-09 Impact factor: 2.474