Jacob K Jensen1,2, Johanne S Madsen1,2, Malte E K Jensen1,2, Andreas Kjaer3,4, Rasmus S Ripa1,2. 1. Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2. Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. akjaer@sund.ku.dk. 4. Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. akjaer@sund.ku.dk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess and compare the arterial uptake of the inflammatory macrophage targeting PET tracer [64Cu]Cu-DOTATATE in patients with no or known cardiovascular disease (CVD) to investigate potential differences in uptake. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients who had undergone [64Cu]Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT imaging for neuroendocrine neoplasm disease were retrospectively allocated to three groups: controls with no known CVD risk factors (n = 22), patients with CVD risk factors (n = 24), or patients with known ischemic CVD (n = 33). Both maximum, mean of max and most-diseased segment (mds) standardized uptake value (SUV) and target-to-background ratio (TBR) uptake metrics were measured and reported for the carotid arteries and the aorta. To assess reproducibility between different reviewers, Bland-Altman plots were made. RESULTS: For the carotid arteries, SUVmax (P = .03), SUVmds (0.05), TBRmax (P < .01), TBRmds (P < .01), and mean-of-max TBR (P = .01) were overall shown to provide a group-wise difference in uptake. When measuring uptake values in the aorta, a group-wise difference was only observed with TBRmds (P = .04). Overall, reproducibility of the reported uptake metrics was excellent for SUVs and good to excellent for TBRs for both the carotid arteries and the aorta. CONCLUSION: Using [64Cu]Cu-DOTATATE PET imaging as a marker of atherosclerotic inflammation, we were able to demonstrate differences in some of the most frequently reported uptake metrics in patients with different degrees of CVD. Measurements of the carotid artery as either maximum uptake values or most-diseased segment analysis showed the best ability to discriminate between the groups.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess and compare the arterial uptake of the inflammatory macrophage targeting PET tracer [64Cu]Cu-DOTATATE in patients with no or known cardiovascular disease (CVD) to investigate potential differences in uptake. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients who had undergone [64Cu]Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT imaging for neuroendocrine neoplasm disease were retrospectively allocated to three groups: controls with no known CVD risk factors (n = 22), patients with CVD risk factors (n = 24), or patients with known ischemic CVD (n = 33). Both maximum, mean of max and most-diseased segment (mds) standardized uptake value (SUV) and target-to-background ratio (TBR) uptake metrics were measured and reported for the carotid arteries and the aorta. To assess reproducibility between different reviewers, Bland-Altman plots were made. RESULTS: For the carotid arteries, SUVmax (P = .03), SUVmds (0.05), TBRmax (P < .01), TBRmds (P < .01), and mean-of-max TBR (P = .01) were overall shown to provide a group-wise difference in uptake. When measuring uptake values in the aorta, a group-wise difference was only observed with TBRmds (P = .04). Overall, reproducibility of the reported uptake metrics was excellent for SUVs and good to excellent for TBRs for both the carotid arteries and the aorta. CONCLUSION: Using [64Cu]Cu-DOTATATE PET imaging as a marker of atherosclerotic inflammation, we were able to demonstrate differences in some of the most frequently reported uptake metrics in patients with different degrees of CVD. Measurements of the carotid artery as either maximum uptake values or most-diseased segment analysis showed the best ability to discriminate between the groups.
Authors: Amr Abdelbaky; Erin Corsini; Amparo L Figueroa; Sara Fontanez; Sharath Subramanian; Maros Ferencik; Thomas J Brady; Udo Hoffmann; Ahmed Tawakol Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2013-07-05 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Philip Greenland; Michael J Blaha; Matthew J Budoff; Raimund Erbel; Karol E Watson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-07-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Adam Timmis; Panos Vardas; Nick Townsend; Aleksandra Torbica; Hugo Katus; Delphine De Smedt; Chris P Gale; Aldo P Maggioni; Steffen E Petersen; Radu Huculeci; Dzianis Kazakiewicz; Victor de Benito Rubio; Barbara Ignatiuk; Zahra Raisi-Estabragh; Agnieszka Pawlak; Efstratios Karagiannidis; Roderick Treskes; Dan Gaita; John F Beltrame; Alex McConnachie; Isabel Bardinet; Ian Graham; Marcus Flather; Perry Elliott; Elias A Mossialos; Franz Weidinger; Stephan Achenbach Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Ahmed Tawakol; Zahi A Fayad; Robin Mogg; Achilles Alon; Michael T Klimas; Hayes Dansky; Sharath S Subramanian; Amr Abdelbaky; James H F Rudd; Michael E Farkouh; Irene O Nunes; Chan R Beals; Sudha S Shankar Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-05-30 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Rouchelle S Sriranjan; Jason M Tarkin; Nicholas R Evans; Elizabeth P V Le; Mohammed M Chowdhury; James H F Rudd Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Salim S Virani; Alvaro Alonso; Hugo J Aparicio; Emelia J Benjamin; Marcio S Bittencourt; Clifton W Callaway; April P Carson; Alanna M Chamberlain; Susan Cheng; Francesca N Delling; Mitchell S V Elkind; Kelly R Evenson; Jane F Ferguson; Deepak K Gupta; Sadiya S Khan; Brett M Kissela; Kristen L Knutson; Chong D Lee; Tené T Lewis; Junxiu Liu; Matthew Shane Loop; Pamela L Lutsey; Jun Ma; Jason Mackey; Seth S Martin; David B Matchar; Michael E Mussolino; Sankar D Navaneethan; Amanda Marma Perak; Gregory A Roth; Zainab Samad; Gary M Satou; Emily B Schroeder; Svati H Shah; Christina M Shay; Andrew Stokes; Lisa B VanWagner; Nae-Yuh Wang; Connie W Tsao Journal: Circulation Date: 2021-01-27 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Fleur M van der Valk; Simone L Verweij; Koos A H Zwinderman; Aart C Strang; Yannick Kaiser; Henk A Marquering; Aart J Nederveen; Erik S G Stroes; Hein J Verberne; James H F Rudd Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-09-14
Authors: Rasmus S Ripa; Emilie H Zobel; Bernt J von Scholten; Jacob K Jensen; Tina Binderup; Lars J Diaz; Viktor R Curovic; Tine W Hansen; Peter Rossing; Andreas Kjaer Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 7.792