Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Impact of PET Reconstruction on Amyloid-β Quantitation in Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analyses
Gihan P Ruwanpathirana, Robert C Williams, Colin L Masters, Christopher C Rowe, Leigh A Johnston, Catherine E Davey. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 2024-05-01
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
In the cross-sectional study, CLs in both the Aβ- and the Aβ+ groups were impacted by the FWHM of the reconstruction method. Without postreconstruction smoothing, Aβ- CLs increased for a FWHM of 4.5 mm or more, whereas Aβ+ CLs decreased across the FWHM range. High-resolution reconstructions provided the best statistical separation between groups. In the longitudinal study, the median ARD of low-resolution reconstructed data for the Aβ- group was greater than zero whereas the ARDs of higher-resolution reconstructions were not significantly different from zero, indicating more consistent rate estimates in the higher-resolution reconstructions. Higher-resolution reconstructions identified 10 additional Aβ accumulators in the Aβ- group, resulting in a 22% increased group size compared with the low-resolution reconstructions. Higher-resolution reconstructions reduced the average CLs of the negative group by 12 points. High-resolution PET reconstructions, inherently less impacted by partial-volume effect, may improve Aβ PET quantitation in both cross-sectional and longitudinal data. In the cross-sectional analysis, separation of CLs between Aβ- and Aβ+ cohorts increased with spatial resolution. Higher-resolution reconstructions also exhibited both improved consistency and improved sensitivity in measures of Aβ accumulation. These features suggest that higher-resolution reconstructions may be advantageous in early-stage AD therapies.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Ruwanpathirana, G. P., Williams, R. C., Masters, C. L., Rowe, C. C., Johnston, L. A., & Davey, C. E. (2024). Impact of PET Reconstruction on Amyloid-β Quantitation in Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analyses. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.123.266188
Vancouver
Ruwanpathirana GP, Williams RC, Masters CL, Rowe CC, Johnston LA, Davey CE. Impact of PET Reconstruction on Amyloid-β Quantitation in Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analyses. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. 2024. doi:10.2967/jnumed.123.266188. PMID: 38575189.
BibTeX
@article{ruwanpathirana2024-38575189,
author = {Ruwanpathirana, Gihan P and Williams, Robert C and Masters, Colin L and Rowe, Christopher C and Johnston, Leigh A and Davey, Catherine E},
title = {{Impact of PET Reconstruction on Amyloid-β Quantitation in Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analyses}},
journal = {Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.2967/jnumed.123.266188},
pmid = {38575189},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.123.266188}
}
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
- In the cross-sectional study, CLs in both the Aβ- and the Aβ+ groups were impacted by the FWHM of the reconstruction method.
- Without postreconstruction smoothing, Aβ- CLs increased for a FWHM of 4.5 mm or more, whereas Aβ+ CLs decreased across the FWHM range.
- High-resolution reconstructions provided the best statistical separation between groups.
- In the longitudinal study, the median ARD of low-resolution reconstructed data for the Aβ- group was greater than zero whereas the ARDs of higher-resolution reconstructions were not significantly different from zero, indicating more consistent rate estimates in the higher-resolution reconstructions.
- Higher-resolution reconstructions identified 10 additional Aβ accumulators in the Aβ- group, resulting in a 22% increased group size compared with the low-resolution reconstructions.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Participants89
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 61/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported 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, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 61 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 | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in 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 | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 89 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) |
| 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 38575189) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 34 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 61 out of 100. |
| Total | 61 / 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.
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “18f”
318 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 318 tagged studies.