Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
FIBT versus florbetaben and PiB: a preclinical comparison study with amyloid-PET in transgenic mice
Behrooz H Yousefi, Boris von Reutern, Daniela Scherübl, André Manook, Markus Schwaiger, Timo Grimmer, Gjermund Henriksen, Stefan Förster et al.. EJNMMI research, 2015-03-28
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
We found that FIBT (2-(p-methylaminophenyl)-7-(2-[(18)F]fluoroethoxy)imidazo[2,1-b]benzothiazole) compares favorably to florbetaben as a high-contrasting PET radiopharmaceutical for imaging Aβ pathology. The excellent pharmacokinetics of FIBT in combination with its high-binding affinity towards Aβ resulted in feasible high-contrast imaging of Aβ with high global cortex to cerebellum standard uptake value ratio (SUVR) in 24-month-old tg mice (tg 1.68 ± 0.15 vs. ctl 0.95 ± 0.02). The SUVRs in transgenic versus control animals (SUVRtg/SUVRctl) for FIBT (1.78 ± 0.16) were similar to the ratios as observed in humans (SUVRAD/SUVRctl) for the established gold standard Pittsburgh compound B (PiB) (1.65 ± 0.41). This head-to-head PET tracer comparison study in mice indicated the good imaging properties of [(18)F]FIBT, such as high initial brain uptake, fast clearance of the brain, and high binding affinity towards Aβ as directly compared to the established amyloid tracers. Moreover, the preclinical study design is recommendable for reliable assessment and comparison of novel radiopharmaceuticals.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Yousefi, B. H., von Reutern, B., Scherübl, D., Manook, A., Schwaiger, M., Grimmer, T., et al. (2015). FIBT versus florbetaben and PiB: a preclinical comparison study with amyloid-PET in transgenic mice. EJNMMI research. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-015-0090-6
Vancouver
Yousefi BH, von Reutern B, Scherübl D, Manook A, Schwaiger M, Grimmer T, et al. FIBT versus florbetaben and PiB: a preclinical comparison study with amyloid-PET in transgenic mice. EJNMMI research. 2015. doi:10.1186/s13550-015-0090-6. PMID: 25918674.
BibTeX
@article{yousefi2015-25918674,
author = {Yousefi, Behrooz H and von Reutern, Boris and Scherübl, Daniela and Manook, André and Schwaiger, Markus and Grimmer, Timo and Henriksen, Gjermund and Förster, Stefan and others},
title = {{FIBT versus florbetaben and PiB: a preclinical comparison study with amyloid-PET in transgenic mice}},
journal = {EJNMMI research},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.1186/s13550-015-0090-6},
pmid = {25918674},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-015-0090-6}
}
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
- We found that FIBT (2-(p-methylaminophenyl)-7-(2-[(18)F]fluoroethoxy)imidazo[2,1-b]benzothiazole) compares favorably to florbetaben as a high-contrasting PET radiopharmaceutical for imaging Aβ pathology.
- The excellent pharmacokinetics of FIBT in combination with its high-binding affinity towards Aβ resulted in feasible high-contrast imaging of Aβ with high global cortex to cerebellum standard uptake value ratio (SUVR) in 24-month-old tg mice (tg 1.68 ± 0.15 vs. ctl 0.95 ± 0.02).
- The SUVRs in transgenic versus control animals (SUVRtg/SUVRctl) for FIBT (1.78 ± 0.16) were similar to the ratios as observed in humans (SUVRAD/SUVRctl) for the established gold standard Pittsburgh compound B (PiB) (1.65 ± 0.41).
- This head-to-head PET tracer comparison study in mice indicated the good imaging properties of [(18)F]FIBT, such as high initial brain uptake, fast clearance of the brain, and high binding affinity towards Aβ as directly compared to the established amyloid tracers.
- Moreover, the preclinical study design is recommendable for reliable assessment and comparison of novel radiopharmaceuticals.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 38/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (EJNMMI research) |
| 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 | 2015 — 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 | Laboratory or animal study (title names “transgenic”) — scores zero |
| 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 25918674) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 21 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 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 “18f”
319 studies in the library carry the topic tag “18f”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 319 tagged studies.