Kevin Duff1, Kevin P Horn2, John M Hoffman2,3. 1. Department of Neurology, Center for Alzheimer's Care, Imaging and Research. 2. Center for Quantitative Cancer Imaging, Huntsman Cancer Institute. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Longitudinal studies into the variability of F-Flutemetamol uptake are lacking. METHODS/PATIENTS: Therefore, the current study examined change in F-Flutemetamol uptake in 19 nondemented older adults (65 to 82 y old) who were either cognitively intact or had Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) who were scanned twice across 3.6 years. RESULTS: Baseline and follow-up composite SUVRs were significantly correlated (0.96, P<0.001). Significant increases in the composite SUVR from baseline to follow-up were observed (P=0.002). For the total sample, the average difference over this time period when using the composite SUVR was 6.8%. Similar results were seen in subsets of the total sample (MCI vs. cognitively intact, amyloid positive vs. negative). Finally, a Reliable Change Index that exceeded ±0.046 SUVR units would indicate a significant change of F-Flutemetamol. CONCLUSIONS: The current results extend the limited literature on longitudinal variability of F-Flutemetamol uptake across 3.6 years, which should give clinicians and researchers more confidence in the stability of this amyloid imaging agent in longer therapeutic and prevention trials in cognitive decline in MCI and Alzheimer disease.
PURPOSE: Longitudinal studies into the variability of F-Flutemetamol uptake are lacking. METHODS/PATIENTS: Therefore, the current study examined change in F-Flutemetamol uptake in 19 nondemented older adults (65 to 82 y old) who were either cognitively intact or had Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) who were scanned twice across 3.6 years. RESULTS: Baseline and follow-up composite SUVRs were significantly correlated (0.96, P<0.001). Significant increases in the composite SUVR from baseline to follow-up were observed (P=0.002). For the total sample, the average difference over this time period when using the composite SUVR was 6.8%. Similar results were seen in subsets of the total sample (MCI vs. cognitively intact, amyloid positive vs. negative). Finally, a Reliable Change Index that exceeded ±0.046 SUVR units would indicate a significant change of F-Flutemetamol. CONCLUSIONS: The current results extend the limited literature on longitudinal variability of F-Flutemetamol uptake across 3.6 years, which should give clinicians and researchers more confidence in the stability of this amyloid imaging agent in longer therapeutic and prevention trials in cognitive decline in MCI and Alzheimer disease.
Authors: Brian J Lopresti; William E Klunk; Chester A Mathis; Jessica A Hoge; Scott K Ziolko; Xueling Lu; Carolyn C Meltzer; Kurt Schimmel; Nicholas D Tsopelas; Steven T DeKosky; Julie C Price Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Kevin Duff; Norman L Foster; Kathryn Dennett; Dustin B Hammers; Lauren V Zollinger; Paul E Christian; Regan I Butterfield; Britney E Beardmore; Angela Y Wang; Kathryn A Morton; John M Hoffman Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2013-06-30 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: Dean F Wong; Abhay R Moghekar; Daniele Rigamonti; James R Brašić; Olivier Rousset; William Willis; Chris Buckley; Adrian Smith; Beril Gok; Paul Sherwin; Igor D Grachev Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Rik Vandenberghe; Koen Van Laere; Adrian Ivanoiu; Eric Salmon; Christine Bastin; Eric Triau; Steen Hasselbalch; Ian Law; Allan Andersen; Alex Korner; Lennart Minthon; Gaëtan Garraux; Natalie Nelissen; Guy Bormans; Chris Buckley; Rikard Owenius; Lennart Thurfjell; Gill Farrar; David J Brooks Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Susan M Landau; Allison Fero; Suzanne L Baker; Robert Koeppe; Mark Mintun; Kewei Chen; Eric M Reiman; William J Jagust Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Natalie Nelissen; Koen Van Laere; Lennart Thurfjell; Rikard Owenius; Mathieu Vandenbulcke; Michel Koole; Guy Bormans; David J Brooks; Rik Vandenberghe Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-07-17 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Ville Leinonen; Juha O Rinne; Dean F Wong; David A Wolk; John Q Trojanowski; Paul F Sherwin; Adrian Smith; Kerstin Heurling; Mandy Su; Igor D Grachev Journal: Acta Neuropathol Commun Date: 2014-04-22 Impact factor: 7.801
Authors: Stephen Salloway; Jose E Gamez; Upinder Singh; Carl H Sadowsky; Teresa Villena; Marwan N Sabbagh; Thomas G Beach; Ranjan Duara; Adam S Fleisher; Kirk A Frey; Zuzana Walker; Arvinder Hunjan; Yavir M Escovar; Marc E Agronin; Joel Ross; Andrea Bozoki; Mary Akinola; Jiong Shi; Rik Vandenberghe; Milos D Ikonomovic; Paul F Sherwin; Gill Farrar; Adrian P L Smith; Christopher J Buckley; Dietmar Rudolf Thal; Michelle Zanette; Craig Curtis Journal: Alzheimers Dement (Amst) Date: 2017-07-01
Authors: Elizabeth Morris; Anastasia Chalkidou; Alexander Hammers; Janet Peacock; Jennifer Summers; Stephen Keevil Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-11-28 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Cyrille Sur; Katarzyna Adamczuk; David Scott; James Kost; Mehul Sampat; Christopher Buckley; Gill Farrar; Ben Newton; Joyce Suhy; Idriss Bennacef; Michael F Egan Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2022-07-07 Impact factor: 3.488