Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Assessment of beta-amyloid in a frontal cortical brain biopsy specimen and by positron emission tomography with carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh Compound B
Leinonen V, Alafuzoff I, Aalto S, Suotunen T, Savolainen S, Någren K, Tapiola T, Pirttilä T et al.. Archives of neurology, 2008-08-11
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Plain-language summary
Objective To compare carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh Compound B ([11C]PiB) positron emission tomography (PET) findings in patients with and without Alzheimer disease lesions in frontal cortical biopsy specimens. Design Cross-sectional study of [11C]PiB PET findings in patients with or without beta-amyloid (Abeta) aggregates in frontal cortical biopsy specimens. Setting Two university hospitals in Finland. Patients Ten patients who had undergone intraventricular pressure monitoring with a frontal cortical biopsy (evaluated for Abeta aggregates and hyperphosphorylated tau) for suspected normal-pressure hydrocephalus. Interventions [11C]PiB PET and evaluation for cognitive impairment using a battery of neuropsychological tests. Main outcome measures Immunohistochemical evaluation for Abeta aggregates and hyperphosphorylated tau in the frontal cortical biopsy specimen and [11C]PiB PET. Results In patients with Abeta aggregates in the frontal cortical biopsy specimen, PET imaging revealed higher [11C]PiB uptake (P < .05) in the frontal, parietal, and lateral temporal cortices and in the striatum as compared with the patients without frontal Abeta deposits. Conclusions Our study supports the use of noninvasive [11C]PiB PET in the assessment of Abeta deposition in the brain. Large prospective studies are required to verify whether [11C]PiB PET will be a diagnostic aid, particularly in early Alzheimer disease.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Leinonen, V., Alafuzoff, I., Aalto, S., Suotunen, T., Savolainen, S., Någren, K., et al. (2008). Assessment of beta-amyloid in a frontal cortical brain biopsy specimen and by positron emission tomography with carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh Compound B. Archives of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.65.10.noc80013
Vancouver
Leinonen V, Alafuzoff I, Aalto S, Suotunen T, Savolainen S, Någren K, et al. Assessment of beta-amyloid in a frontal cortical brain biopsy specimen and by positron emission tomography with carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh Compound B. Archives of neurology. 2008. doi:10.1001/archneur.65.10.noc80013. PMID: 18695050.
BibTeX
@article{leinonen2008-18695050,
author = {Leinonen, V. and Alafuzoff, I. and Aalto, S. and Suotunen, T. and Savolainen, S. and Någren, K. and Tapiola, T. and Pirttilä, T. and others},
title = {{Assessment of beta-amyloid in a frontal cortical brain biopsy specimen and by positron emission tomography with carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh Compound B}},
journal = {Archives of neurology},
year = {2008},
doi = {10.1001/archneur.65.10.noc80013},
pmid = {18695050},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.65.10.noc80013}
}
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
- Results In patients with Abeta aggregates in the frontal cortical biopsy specimen, PET imaging revealed higher [11C]PiB uptake (P < .05) in the frontal, parietal, and lateral temporal cortices and in the striatum as compared with the patients without frontal Abeta deposits.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Archives of neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in time |
| 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 | 2008 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 18695050) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 25 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.