Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
11C-PIB binding is increased in patients with cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related hemorrhage
Ly JV, Donnan GA, Villemagne VL, Zavala JA, Ma H, O'Keefe G, Gong SJ, Gunawan RM et al.. Neurology, 2010-02-01
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Background The in vivo diagnosis of cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is inferred from clinical and structural imaging features. (11)C-Pittsburgh compound B (PIB) is a PET ligand that binds to beta-amyloid in extracellular plaques and vessel walls. We hypothesized that patients with a clinical diagnosis of CAA-related hemorrhage (CAAH) have increased (11)C-PIB uptake and that the pattern differs from Alzheimer disease (AD). Methodology Patients with CAAH based on established clinical criteria were studied using (11)C-PIB PET and were compared with age-matched controls and patients with AD. Distribution volume ratio (DVR) parametric maps were created using the cerebellar cortex as a reference region. Results Twelve patients with CAAH of mean age 73.9 (range 58-93) years were compared with 22 normal controls and 13 patients with AD of mean age 71.8 (59-83) and 73.8 (56-90) years, respectively. CAAH PIB median DVR binding was higher in cortical regions (1.69, interquartile range 1.44-1.97) compared with controls (1.32, 1.21-1.44, p = 0.002) but lower than AD (2.04, 1.93-2.26, p = 0.004). The occipital-global uptake ratio was lower among patients with AD than among patients with CAAH (p = 0.008), and the frontal-global uptake ratio was higher (p = 0.012). Conclusion (11)C-Pittsburgh compound B (PIB) binding is moderately increased in most patients with probable cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA)-related intracerebral hemorrhage. The distribution may differ from that seen in Alzheimer disease. (11)C-PIB PET may assist in the in vivo diagnosis of CAA and serve as a surrogate marker for future therapeutic studies.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Ly, J. V., Donnan, G. A., Villemagne, V. L., Zavala, J. A., Ma, H., O'Keefe, G., et al. (2010). 11C-PIB binding is increased in patients with cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related hemorrhage. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181cef7e3
Vancouver
Ly JV, Donnan GA, Villemagne VL, Zavala JA, Ma H, O'Keefe G, et al. 11C-PIB binding is increased in patients with cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related hemorrhage. Neurology. 2010. doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181cef7e3. PMID: 20142615.
BibTeX
@article{ly2010-20142615,
author = {Ly, J. V. and Donnan, G. A. and Villemagne, V. L. and Zavala, J. A. and Ma, H. and O'Keefe, G. and Gong, S. J. and Gunawan, R. M. and others},
title = {{11C-PIB binding is increased in patients with cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related hemorrhage}},
journal = {Neurology},
year = {2010},
doi = {10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181cef7e3},
pmid = {20142615},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181cef7e3}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Methodology Patients with CAAH based on established clinical criteria were studied using (11)C-PIB PET and were compared with age-matched controls and patients with AD.
- Results Twelve patients with CAAH of mean age 73.9 (range 58-93) years were compared with 22 normal controls and 13 patients with AD of mean age 71.8 (59-83) and 73.8 (56-90) years, respectively.
- CAAH PIB median DVR binding was higher in cortical regions (1.69, interquartile range 1.44-1.97) compared with controls (1.32, 1.21-1.44, p = 0.002) but lower than AD (2.04, 1.93-2.26, p = 0.004).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Participants13
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 13 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 20142615) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.