Home › Research › Disease mechanisms
Evaluation of early-phase [18F]-florbetaben PET acquisition in clinical routine cases
Daerr S, Brendel M, Zach C, Mille E, Schilling D, Zacherl MJ, Bürger K, Danek A et al.. NeuroImage. Clinical, 2016-10-08
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Objectives In recent years several [ 18 F]-labelled amyloid PET tracers have been developed and have obtained clinical approval. There is accumulating evidence that early (post injection) acquisitions with these tracers are equally informative as conventional blood flow and metabolism studies for diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, but there have been few side-by-side studies. Therefore, we investigated the performance of early acquisitions of [ 18 F]-florbetaben (FBB) PET compared to [ 18 F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET in a clinical setting. Methods All subjects were recruited with clinical suspicion of dementia due to neurodegenerative disease. FDG PET was undertaken by conventional methods, and amyloid PET was performed with FBB, with early recordings for the initial 10 min (early-phase FBB), and late recordings at 90-110 min p.i. (late-phase FBB). Regional SUVR with cerebellar and global mean normalization were calculated for early-phase FBB and FDG PET. Pearson correlation coefficients between FDG and early-phase FBB were calculated for predefined cortical brain regions. Furthermore, a visual interpretation of disease pattern using 3-dimensional stereotactic surface projections (3D-SSP) was performed, with assessment of intra-reader agreement. Results Among a total of 33 patients (mean age 67.5 ± 11.0 years) included in the study, 18 were visually rated amyloid-positive, and 15 amyloid-negative based on late-phase FBB scans. Correlation coefficients for early-phase FBB vs. FDG scans displayed excellent agreement in all target brain regions for global mean normalization. Cerebellar normalization gave strong, but significantly lower correlations. 3D representations of early-phase FBB visually resembled the corresponding FDG PET images, irrespective of the amyloid-status of the late FBB scans. Conclusions Early-phase FBB acquisitions correlate on a relative quantitative and visual level with FDG PET scans, irrespective of the amyloid plaque density assessed in late FBB imaging. Thus, early-phase FBB uptake depicts a metabolism-like image, suggesting it as a valid surrogate marker for synaptic dysfunction, which could ultimately circumvent the need for additional FDG PET investigation in diagnosis of dementia.
Key findings
- Therefore, we investigated the performance of early acquisitions of [ 18 F]-florbetaben (FBB) PET compared to [ 18 F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET in a clinical setting.
- Results Among a total of 33 patients (mean age 67.5 ± 11.0 years) included in the study, 18 were visually rated amyloid-positive, and 15 amyloid-negative based on late-phase FBB scans.
- Cerebellar normalization gave strong, but significantly lower correlations. 3D representations of early-phase FBB visually resembled the corresponding FDG PET images, irrespective of the amyloid-status of the late FBB scans.
Study details
- Participants33
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
Published in a peer-reviewed 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 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (NeuroImage. Clinical) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2017 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 33 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 28138429) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 28 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100. |
| Total | 48 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Daerr, S., Brendel, M., Zach, C., Mille, E., Schilling, D., Zacherl, M. J., et al. (2017). Evaluation of early-phase [18F]-florbetaben PET acquisition in clinical routine cases. NeuroImage. Clinical. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2016.10.005
Vancouver
Daerr S, Brendel M, Zach C, Mille E, Schilling D, Zacherl MJ, et al. Evaluation of early-phase [18F]-florbetaben PET acquisition in clinical routine cases. NeuroImage. Clinical. 2017. doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2016.10.005. PMID: 28138429.
BibTeX
@article{daerr2017-28138429,
author = {Daerr, S. and Brendel, M. and Zach, C. and Mille, E. and Schilling, D. and Zacherl, M. J. and Bürger, K. and Danek, A. and others},
title = {{Evaluation of early-phase [18F]-florbetaben PET acquisition in clinical routine cases}},
journal = {NeuroImage. Clinical},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1016/j.nicl.2016.10.005},
pmid = {28138429},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2016.10.005}
}
Related studies in Disease mechanisms
Also in Disease mechanisms
128 studies in the library are filed under Disease mechanisms with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Disease mechanisms hub.