Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Quantification of [18F]florbetapir: A test-retest tracer kinetic modelling study
Sandeep Sv Golla, Sander Cj Verfaillie, Ronald Boellaard, Sofie M Adriaanse, Marissa D Zwan, Robert C Schuit, Tessa Timmers, Colin Groot et al.. Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 2018-06-13
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Accumulation of amyloid beta can be visualized using [18F]florbetapir positron emission tomography. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal model for quantifying [18F]florbetapir uptake and to assess test-retest reliability of corresponding outcome measures. Eight Alzheimer's disease patients (age: 67 ± 6 years, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE): 23 ± 3) and eight controls (age: 63 ± 4 years, MMSE: 30 ± 0) were included. Ninety-minute dynamic positron emission tomography scans, together with arterial blood sampling, were acquired immediately following a bolus injection of 294 ± 32 MBq [18F]florbetapir. Several plasma input models and the simplified reference tissue model (SRTM) were evaluated. The Akaike information criterion was used to identify the preferred kinetic model. Compared to controls, Alzheimer's disease patients had lower MMSE scores and evidence for cortical Aβ pathology. A reversible two-tissue compartment model with fitted blood volume fraction (2T4k_VB) was the preferred model for describing [18F]florbetapir kinetics. SRTM-derived non-displaceable binding potential (BPND) correlated well (r2 = 0.83, slope = 0.86) with plasma input-derived distribution volume ratio. Test-retest reliability for plasma input-derived distribution volume ratio, SRTM-derived BPND and SUVr(50-70) were r = 0.88, r = 0.91 and r = 0.86, respectively. In vivo kinetics of [18F]florbetapir could best be described by a reversible two-tissue compartmental model and [18F]florbetapir BPND can be reliably estimated using an SRTM.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Golla, S. S., Verfaillie, S. C., Boellaard, R., Adriaanse, S. M., Zwan, M. D., Schuit, R. C., et al. (2019). Quantification of [18F]florbetapir: A test-retest tracer kinetic modelling study. Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678x18783628
Vancouver
Golla SS, Verfaillie SC, Boellaard R, Adriaanse SM, Zwan MD, Schuit RC, et al. Quantification of [18F]florbetapir: A test-retest tracer kinetic modelling study. Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism. 2019. doi:10.1177/0271678x18783628. PMID: 29897009.
BibTeX
@article{golla2019-29897009,
author = {Golla, Sandeep Sv and Verfaillie, Sander Cj and Boellaard, Ronald and Adriaanse, Sofie M and Zwan, Marissa D and Schuit, Robert C and Timmers, Tessa and Groot, Colin and others},
title = {{Quantification of [18F]florbetapir: A test-retest tracer kinetic modelling study}},
journal = {Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1177/0271678x18783628},
pmid = {29897009},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678x18783628}
}
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
- Compared to controls, Alzheimer's disease patients had lower MMSE scores and evidence for cortical Aβ pathology.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 39/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 39 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism) |
| 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 | 2019 — within 10 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) |
| 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 29897009) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 22 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 39 out of 100. |
| Total | 39 / 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.