Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Consideration of optimal time window for Pittsburgh compound B PET summed uptake measurements
McNamee RL, Yee SH, Price JC, Klunk WE, Rosario B, Weissfeld L, Ziolko S, Berginc M et al.. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 2009-02-17
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Unlabelled The standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR, or summed tissue ratio) has been used effectively in Pittsburgh compound B (PiB) PET studies to distinguish subjects who have significant amyloid-beta deposition in their brain from those who do not. Relative to quantitative measurements, advantages of the SUVR are improved study feasibility and low test-retest variation; disadvantages include inherent bias (PiB retention overestimation) and potential for time-varying outcomes. The PiB SUVR has proven to be highly correlated with quantitative outcomes and to allow reliable detection of significant group differences (or effective contrasts). In this work, regional PiB SUVRs were examined across 9 time windows to select the window that provided the best trade-offs between bias, correlation, and effective contrast. Methods A total of 40 dynamic PiB PET studies were performed on controls (n = 16), patients with Alzheimer disease (AD; n = 11), and patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 13) (555 MBq [15 mCi], 90-min scan, and arterial blood sampling). The SUVR was computed for five 20-min and four 30-min windows that spanned the 30- to 90-min postinjection period. The SUVRs were compared with Logan graphical distribution volume ratio (DVR) measurements (35-90 min), determined with arterial blood as input and without arterial blood as input (cerebellum as reference). Results Greater correlation and more bias were generally observed for the SUVR measurement at later times than at earlier times (relative to DVR). The effective contrast between the control and AD PiB SUVRs was slightly better for earlier data than for later data. The temporal dynamics of the SUVR measurement indicated greater stability in the measurement at 40 min after injection. Conclusion The 50- to 70-min time window provided a good compromise between physiologic validity, stability, sensitivity, and clinical feasibility across the control, MCI, and AD subject data examined in this study. The 40- to 60-min period demonstrated many advantages and should be used in studies limited by low injected dose. Although more biased than the 40- to 60-min SUVR, the 50- to 70-min SUVR was thought to be optimal because of greater measurement stability, which may prove to be important for longitudinal multisite studies performed in control, MCI, and AD subjects that are not dose-limited.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
McNamee, R. L., Yee, S. H., Price, J. C., Klunk, W. E., Rosario, B., Weissfeld, L., et al. (2009). Consideration of optimal time window for Pittsburgh compound B PET summed uptake measurements. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.108.057612
Vancouver
McNamee RL, Yee SH, Price JC, Klunk WE, Rosario B, Weissfeld L, et al. Consideration of optimal time window for Pittsburgh compound B PET summed uptake measurements. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. 2009. doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.057612. PMID: 19223409.
BibTeX
@article{mcnamee2009-19223409,
author = {McNamee, R. L. and Yee, S. H. and Price, J. C. and Klunk, W. E. and Rosario, B. and Weissfeld, L. and Ziolko, S. and Berginc, M. and others},
title = {{Consideration of optimal time window for Pittsburgh compound B PET summed uptake measurements}},
journal = {Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine},
year = {2009},
doi = {10.2967/jnumed.108.057612},
pmid = {19223409},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.108.057612}
}
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
- Unlabelled The standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR, or summed tissue ratio) has been used effectively in Pittsburgh compound B (PiB) PET studies to distinguish subjects who have significant amyloid-beta deposition in their brain from those who do not.
- The PiB SUVR has proven to be highly correlated with quantitative outcomes and to allow reliable detection of significant group differences (or effective contrasts).
- The SUVRs were compared with Logan graphical distribution volume ratio (DVR) measurements (35-90 min), determined with arterial blood as input and without arterial blood as input (cerebellum as reference).
- Results Greater correlation and more bias were generally observed for the SUVR measurement at later times than at earlier times (relative to DVR).
- The 40- to 60-min period demonstrated many advantages and should be used in studies limited by low injected dose.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants16
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 59/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for 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 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2009 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 16 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 19223409) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 34 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 59 out of 100. |
| Total | 59 / 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 Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “optimal”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “optimal”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.