Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Development of positron emission tomography β-amyloid plaque imaging agents
Mathis CA, Mason NS, Lopresti BJ, Klunk WE.. Seminars in nuclear medicine, 2012-11-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
For 100 years, β-amyloid (Aβ) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) have been recognized as the neuropathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and their presence or absence could only be assessed postmortem using stains and dyes that identified these microscopic structures. Approximately 10 years ago, the first successful Aβ plaque-specific positron emission tomography (PET) imaging study was conducted in a living human subject clinically diagnosed with probable AD using the (11)C-labeled radiopharmaceutical Pittsburgh Compound B (PiB). Laboratory studies and preclinical evaluations to design PiB began a decade earlier than the first human PiB PET study and involved chemical modifications of different well-known dyes that bound specifically to the extended β-pleated sheets that comprise the fibrils of amyloid proteins such as Aβ plaques, NFTs, α-synuclein deposits, and prions. These preclinical studies were conducted in our laboratories at the University of Pittsburgh, starting with Congo red derivatives, followed by Chrysamine G derivatives, followed by X-series compounds, and finally with neutral derivatives of thioflavin-T. The in vitro and in vivo evaluations of the different derivatives as candidate PET radioligands for imaging Aβ plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in human brain are described in this review, along with the specific evaluation criteria by which the candidate radioligands were judged. Out of these studies came PiB, a PET radioligand that binds selectively and with high affinity to only fibrillar forms of Aβ. PiB has been used in many different human research protocols throughout the world and has demonstrated the usefulness of assessing the Aβ plaque status of subjects many years before the clinical diagnosis of probable AD. Recently, longer-lived (18)F-radiolabeled Aβ-selective radiopharmaceuticals have been developed. It is likely that the full clinical impact of these imaging agents will be realized by identifying presymptomatic subjects who would benefit from early drug treatments with future disease-modifying AD therapeutics.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Mathis, C. A., Mason, N. S., Lopresti, B. J., & Klunk, W. E. (2012). Development of positron emission tomography β-amyloid plaque imaging agents. Seminars in nuclear medicine. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2012.07.001
Vancouver
Mathis CA, Mason NS, Lopresti BJ, Klunk WE. Development of positron emission tomography β-amyloid plaque imaging agents. Seminars in nuclear medicine. 2012. doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2012.07.001. PMID: 23026364.
BibTeX
@article{mathis2012-23026364,
author = {Mathis, C. A. and Mason, N. S. and Lopresti, B. J. and Klunk, W. E.},
title = {{Development of positron emission tomography β-amyloid plaque imaging agents}},
journal = {Seminars in nuclear medicine},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2012.07.001},
pmid = {23026364},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2012.07.001}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- PiB has been used in many different human research protocols throughout the world and has demonstrated the usefulness of assessing the Aβ plaque status of subjects many years before the clinical diagnosis of probable AD.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Seminars in nuclear medicine) |
| 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 | 2012 — 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) |
| 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 23026364) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 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 “development”
5 studies in the library carry the topic tag “development”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 5 tagged studies.