UNLABELLED: The mouse model is currently being explored for various applications with PET imaging. Low resolution of current animal scanners relative to mouse size leads to difficulty in quantitating data from mouse PET images. We have, therefore, investigated methods for determining blood time-activity curves (TACs) from mouse PET studies done with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). METHODS: Eight mice were fasted, the tail vein was injected with 150-300 microCi of FDG and dynamic images were acquired with a CTI/Siemens (Knoxville, TN) animal tomograph for 64.5 min. Concurrently, 11-14 left ventricle (LV) blood samples were drawn directly from the LV chamber. Organ TACs were obtained by drawing circular regions of interest (ROIs) of various sizes on images of the heart, liver and brain. For each mouse, the FDG model parameter K = (K1 x k3)/(k2 + k3) was estimated by a Patlak algorithm with various estimates of the blood TAC and, as a reference tissue TAC, the brain TAC. RESULTS: Most partial-volume-corrected heart ROI TACs overestimated the LV samples. Blood TACs from heart images produced statistically different estimates of K than did the LV samples. The liver image-derived blood TACs yielded estimates of K that were comparable to those yielded by the LV samples. Estimates of K determined with two directly sampled LV points in conjunction with the liver image-derived TAC were not statistically different from the estimates obtained with the LV samples. The size and location of ROIs on images of the liver minimally affected the TACs. CONCLUSION: We have shown that it is experimentally possible to obtain a blood TAC from mouse studies by repeatedly sampling from the LV. We have also shown that images of the liver can be used to reliably estimate the blood TAC. Future FDG PET studies with the mouse model will benefit from this demonstrated ability to noninvasively quantitate blood TACs directly from FDG PET images.
UNLABELLED: The mouse model is currently being explored for various applications with PET imaging. Low resolution of current animal scanners relative to mouse size leads to difficulty in quantitating data from mousePET images. We have, therefore, investigated methods for determining blood time-activity curves (TACs) from mousePET studies done with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). METHODS: Eight mice were fasted, the tail vein was injected with 150-300 microCi of FDG and dynamic images were acquired with a CTI/Siemens (Knoxville, TN) animal tomograph for 64.5 min. Concurrently, 11-14 left ventricle (LV) blood samples were drawn directly from the LV chamber. Organ TACs were obtained by drawing circular regions of interest (ROIs) of various sizes on images of the heart, liver and brain. For each mouse, the FDG model parameter K = (K1 x k3)/(k2 + k3) was estimated by a Patlak algorithm with various estimates of the blood TAC and, as a reference tissue TAC, the brain TAC. RESULTS: Most partial-volume-corrected heart ROI TACs overestimated the LV samples. Blood TACs from heart images produced statistically different estimates of K than did the LV samples. The liver image-derived blood TACs yielded estimates of K that were comparable to those yielded by the LV samples. Estimates of K determined with two directly sampled LV points in conjunction with the liver image-derived TAC were not statistically different from the estimates obtained with the LV samples. The size and location of ROIs on images of the liver minimally affected the TACs. CONCLUSION: We have shown that it is experimentally possible to obtain a blood TAC from mouse studies by repeatedly sampling from the LV. We have also shown that images of the liver can be used to reliably estimate the blood TAC. Future FDGPET studies with the mouse model will benefit from this demonstrated ability to noninvasively quantitate blood TACs directly from FDGPET images.
Authors: M Pissarek; J Meyer-Kirchrath; T Hohlfeld; S Vollmar; A M Oros-Peusquens; U Flögel; C Jacoby; U Krügel; N Schramm Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2009-05-07 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Thomas O'Brien; Jason Oeh; Yang Xiao; Xiaorong Liang; Alexander Vanderbilt; Ann Qin; Lulu Yang; Leslie B Lee; Justin Ly; Ely Cosino; Jennifer A LaCap; Annie Ogasawara; Simon Williams; Michelle Nannini; Bianca M Liederer; Peter Jackson; Peter S Dragovich; Deepak Sampath Journal: Neoplasia Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 5.715
Authors: Mark Muzi; Finbarr O'Sullivan; David A Mankoff; Robert K Doot; Larry A Pierce; Brenda F Kurland; Hannah M Linden; Paul E Kinahan Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-07-21 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: S S Gambhir; J R Barrio; M E Phelps; M Iyer; M Namavari; N Satyamurthy; L Wu; L A Green; E Bauer; D C MacLaren; K Nguyen; A J Berk; S R Cherry; H R Herschman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1999-03-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ruedi K Braun; Melanie Molitor-Dart; Christopher Wigfield; Zhuzai Xiang; Sean B Fain; Ewa Jankowska-Gan; Christine M Seroogy; William J Burlingham; David S Wilkes; David D Brand; Jose Torrealba; Robert B Love Journal: Transplantation Date: 2009-12-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Ian Y Chen; Joseph C Wu; Jung-Jun Min; Gobalakrishnan Sundaresan; Xiaoman Lewis; Qianwa Liang; Harvey R Herschman; Sanjiv S Gambhir Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-03-08 Impact factor: 29.690