nach oben

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

25.01.2020 | Original Article

A kinetics-based approach to amyloid PET semi-quantification

verfasst von: A. Chincarini, E. Peira, M. Corosu, S. Morbelli, M. Bauckneht, S. Capitanio, M. Pardini, D. Arnaldi, C. Vellani, D. D’Ambrosio, V. Garibotto, F. Assal, B. Paghera, G. Savelli, A. Stefanelli, U. P. Guerra, F. Nobili

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 9/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To develop and validate a semi-quantification method (time-delayed ratio, TDr) applied to amyloid PET scans, based on tracer kinetics information.

Methods

The TDr method requires two static scans per subject: one early (~ 0–10 min after the injection) and one late (typically 50–70 min or 90–100 min after the injection, depending on the tracer). High perfusion regions are delineated on the early scan and applied onto the late scan. A SUVr-like ratio is calculated between the average intensities in the high perfusion regions and the late scan hotspot. TDr was applied to a naturalistic multicenter dataset of 143 subjects acquired with [¹⁸F]florbetapir. TDr values are compared to visual evaluation, cortical–cerebellar SUVr, and to the geometrical semi-quantification method ELBA. All three methods are gauged versus the heterogeneity of the dataset.

Results

TDr shows excellent agreement with respect to the binary visual assessment (AUC = 0.99) and significantly correlates with both validated semi-quantification methods, reaching a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.86 with respect to ELBA.

Conclusions

TDr is an alternative approach to previously validated ones (SUVr and ELBA). It requires minimal image processing; it is independent on predefined regions of interest and does not require MR registration. Besides, it takes advantage on the availability of early scans which are becoming common practice while imposing a negligible added patient discomfort.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Jack CR, Bennett DA, Blennow K, Carrillo MC, Dunn B, Haeberlein SB, et al. NIA-AA Research Framework: toward a biological definition of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2018;14:535–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2018.02.018.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Dubois B, Feldman HH, Jacova C, Hampel H, Molinuevo JL, Blennow K, et al. Advancing research diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s disease: the IWG-2 criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:614–29.CrossRefPubMed

Ikonomovic MD, Klunk WE, Abrahamson EE, Mathis CA, Price JC, Tsopelas ND, et al. Post-mortem correlates of in vivo PiB-PET amyloid imaging in a typical case of Alzheimer’s disease. Brain. 2008;131:1630–45. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awn016.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Clark CM, Pontecorvo MJ, Beach TG, Bedell BJ, Coleman RE, Doraiswamy PM, et al. Cerebral PET with florbetapir compared with neuropathology at autopsy for detection of neuritic amyloid-β plaques: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol. 2012;11:669–78.CrossRefPubMed

Thal DR, Beach TG, Zanette M, Heurling K, Chakrabarty A, Ismail A, et al. [18 F]flutemetamol amyloid positron emission tomography in preclinical and symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease: Specific detection of advanced phases of amyloid-β pathology. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11:975–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2015.05.018.CrossRefPubMed

Villemagne VL, Ong K, Mulligan RS, Holl G, Pejoska S, Jones G, et al. Amyloid imaging with (18)F-florbetaben in Alzheimer disease and other dementias. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:1210–7.CrossRefPubMed

Wolz R, Schwarz AJ, Gray KR, Yu P, Hill DLG, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Enrichment of clinical trials in MCI due to AD using markers of amyloid and neurodegeneration. Neurology. 2016;87:1235–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kinahan PE, Fletcher JW. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography standardized uptake values in clinical practice and assessing response to therapy. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010;31:496–505.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Thurfjell L, Lilja J, Lundqvist R, Buckley C, Smith A, Vandenberghe R, et al. Automated quantification of 18F-flutemetamol PET activity for categorizing scans as negative or positive for brain amyloid: concordance with visual image reads. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:1623–8.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Mattsson N, Insel PS, Landau S, Jagust W, Donohue M, Shaw LM, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of CSF Ab42 and florbetapir PET for Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2014;1:534–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Jagust WJ, Landau SM, Koeppe RA, Reiman EM, Chen K, Mathis CA, et al. The Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative 2 PET core: 2015. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11:757–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2015.05.001.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Klunk WE, Koeppe RA, Price JC, Benzinger TL, Devous MD Sr, Jagust WJ, et al. The Centiloid Project: standardizing quantitative amyloid plaque estimation by PET. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11:1–15.e1–4.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Tryputsen V, DiBernardo A, Samtani M, Novak GP, Narayan VA, Raghavan N, et al. Optimizing regions-of-interest composites for capturing treatment effects on brain amyloid in clinical trials. J Alzheimers Dis. 2015;43:809–21.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Su Y, Blazey TM, Snyder AZ, Raichle ME, Marcus DS, Ances BM, et al. Partial volume correction in quantitative amyloid imaging. Neuroimage. 2015;107:55–64.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Schmidt ME, Chiao P, Klein G, Matthews D, Thurfjell L, Cole PE, et al. The influence of biological and technical factors on quantitative analysis of amyloid PET: points to consider and recommendations for controlling variability in longitudinal data. Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11:1050–68.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Chincarini A, Sensi F, Rei L, Bossert I, Morbelli S, Guerra UP, et al. Standardized uptake value ratio-independent evaluation of brain amyloidosis. J Alzheimers Dis. 2016;54:1437–57.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Cecchin D, Barthel H, Poggiali D, Cagnin A, Tiepolt S, Zucchetta P, et al. A new integrated dual time-point amyloid PET/MRI data analysis method. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:2060–72.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Landau SM, Thomas BA, Thurfjell L, Schmidt M, Margolin R, Mintun M, et al. Amyloid PET imaging in Alzheimer’s disease: a comparison of three radiotracers. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:1398–407.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Johnson KA, Minoshima S, Bohnen NI, Donohoe KJ, Foster NL, Herscovitch P, et al. Appropriate use criteria for amyloid PET: a report of the Amyloid Imaging Task Force, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, and the Alzheimer’s Association. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:476–90. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.113.120618.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Wong DF, Rosenberg PB, Zhou Y, Kumar A, Raymont V, Ravert HT, et al. In vivo imaging of amyloid deposition in Alzheimer disease using the radioligand 18F-AV-45 (flobetapir F 18). J Nucl Med. 2010;51:913–20. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.109.069088.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Price JC, Klunk WE, Lopresti BJ, Lu X, Hoge JA, Ziolko SK, et al. Kinetic modeling of amyloid binding in humans using PET imaging and Pittsburgh Compound-B. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2005;25:1528–47.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Contractor KB, Kenny LM, Coombes CR, Turkheimer FE, Aboagye EO, Rosso L. Evaluation of limited blood sampling population input approaches for kinetic quantification of [18F]fluorothymidine PET data. EJNMMI Res. 2012;2:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/2191-219x-2-11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Meyer PT, Hellwig S, Amtage F, Rottenburger C, Sahm U, Reuland P, et al. Dual-biomarker imaging of regional cerebral amyloid load and neuronal activity in dementia with PET and 11C-labeled Pittsburgh compound B. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:393–400.CrossRefPubMed

24.

van Osch MJP, Teeuwisse WM, van Walderveen MAA, Hendrikse J, Kies DA, van Buchem MA. Can arterial spin labeling detect white matter perfusion signal? Magn Reson Med. 2009;62:165–73.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Roberts DA, Detre JA, Bolinger L, Insko EK, Leigh JS. Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of human brain perfusion at 1.5 T using steady-state inversion of arterial water. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1994;91:33–7. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.91.1.33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Asllani I, Borogovac A, Brown TR. Regression algorithm correcting for partial volume effects in arterial spin labeling MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2008;60:1362–71.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Ye FQ, Berman KF, Ellmore T, Esposito G, van Horn JD, Yang Y, et al. H215O PET validation of steady-state arterial spin tagging cerebral blood flow measurements in humans. Magn Reson Med. 2000;44:450–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/1522-2594(200009)44:3<450::aid-mrm16>3.0.co;2-0.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Law I, Iida H, Holm S, Nour S, Rostrup E, Svarer C, et al. Quantitation of regional cerebral blood flow corrected for partial volume effect using O-15 water and PET: II. Normal values and gray matter blood flow response to visual activation. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2000;20:1252–63.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Momjian S, Owler BK, Czosnyka Z, Czosnyka M, Pena A, Pickard JD. Pattern of white matter regional cerebral blood flow and autoregulation in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Brain. 2004;127:965–72.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Owler BK, Momjian S, Czosnyka Z, Czosnyka M, Péna A, Harris NG, et al. Normal pressure hydrocephalus and cerebral blood flow: a PET study of baseline values. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2004;24:17–23.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Leinonen V, Rinne JO, Wong DF, Wolk DA, Trojanowski JQ, Sherwin PF, et al. Diagnostic effectiveness of quantitative [18F]flutemetamol PET imaging for detection of fibrillar amyloid β using cortical biopsy histopathology as the standard of truth in subjects with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2014;2. https://doi.org/10.1186/2051-5960-2-46.

32.

Landau SM, Breault C, Joshi AD, Pontecorvo M, Mathis CA, Jagust WJ, et al. Amyloid-β imaging with Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir: comparing radiotracers and quantification methods. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:70–7. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.109009.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Doraiswamy PM, Sperling RA, Coleman RE, Johnson KA, Reiman EM, Davis MD, et al. Amyloid-β assessed by florbetapir F 18 PET and 18-month cognitive decline: a multicenter study. Neurology. 2012;79:1636–44.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Chen K, Roontiva A, Thiyyagura P, Lee W, Liu X, Ayutyanont N, et al. Improved power for characterizing longitudinal amyloid- PET changes and evaluating amyloid-modifying treatments with a cerebral white matter reference region. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:560–6. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.114.149732.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Landau SM, Fero A, Baker SL, Koeppe R, Mintun M, Chen K, et al. Measurement of longitudinal -amyloid change with 18F-florbetapir PET and standardized uptake value ratios. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:567–74. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.114.148981.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Brendel M, Högenauer M, Delker A, Sauerbeck J, Bartenstein P, Seibyl J, et al. Improved longitudinal [(18)F]-AV45 amyloid PET by white matter reference and VOI-based partial volume effect correction. Neuroimage. 2015;108:450–9.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Fleisher AS, Joshi AD, Sundell KL, Chen Y-F, Kollack-Walker S, Lu M, et al. Use of white matter reference regions for detection of change in florbetapir positron emission tomography from completed phase 3 solanezumab trials. Alzheimers Dement. 2017;13:1117–24.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Su Y, Blazey TM, Owen CJ, Christensen JJ, Friedrichsen K, Joseph-Mathurin N, et al. Quantitative amyloid imaging in autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease: results from the DIAN study group. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0152082.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Fischl B, Dale AM. Measuring the thickness of the human cerebral cortex from magnetic resonance images. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000;97:11050–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Sisodiya S, Free S, Fish D, Shorvon S. MRI-based surface area estimates in the normal adult human brain: evidence for structural organisation. J Anat. 1996;188(Pt 2):425–38.PubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Jones SE, Buchbinder BR, Aharon I. Three-dimensional mapping of cortical thickness using Laplace’s equation. Hum Brain Mapp. 2000;11:12–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0193(200009)11:1<12::aid-hbm20>3.0.co;2-k.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Hutton C, De Vita E, Ashburner J, Deichmann R, Turner R. Voxel-based cortical thickness measurements in MRI. NeuroImage. 2008;40:1701–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.01.027.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Lerch JP, Pruessner JC, Zijdenbos A, Hampel H, Teipel SJ, Evans AC. Focal decline of cortical thickness in Alzheimer’s disease identified by computational neuroanatomy. Cereb Cortex. 2005;15:995–1001.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Daerr S, Brendel M, Zach C, Mille E, Schilling D, Zacherl MJ, et al. Evaluation of early-phase [ 18 F]-florbetaben PET acquisition in clinical routine cases. NeuroImage: Clinical. 2017;14:77–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2016.10.005.CrossRef

45.

Ottoy J, Miedema M, De Puydt C, Verhaeghe J, Deleye S, Engelborghs S, et al. Early frame 18F-AV45 and 18F-FDG-PET as proxies of CBF: comparison to 15O-H2O PET data. Alzheimers Dement. 2017;13:P763–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.1018.CrossRef

46.

Rostomian AH, Madison C, Rabinovici GD, Jagust WJ. Early 11C-PIB frames and 18F-FDG PET measures are comparable: a study validated in a cohort of AD and FTLD patients. J Nucl Med. 2011. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.110.082057.

47.

Chen YJ, Rosario BL, Mowrey W, Laymon CM, Lu X, Lopez OL, et al. Relative 11C-PiB delivery as a proxy of relative CBF: quantitative evaluation using single-session 15O-water and 11C-PiB PET. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1199–205.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Chincarini A, Peira E, Morbelli S, Pardini M, Bauckneht M, Arbizu J, et al. Semi-quantification and grading of amyloid PET: a project of the European Alzheimer’s Disease Consortium (EADC). NeuroImage: Clinical. 2019;23:101846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101846.CrossRef

Titel: A kinetics-based approach to amyloid PET semi-quantification
verfasst von: A. Chincarini
E. Peira
M. Corosu
S. Morbelli
M. Bauckneht
S. Capitanio
M. Pardini
D. Arnaldi
C. Vellani
D. D’Ambrosio
V. Garibotto
F. Assal
B. Paghera
G. Savelli
A. Stefanelli
U. P. Guerra
F. Nobili
Publikationsdatum: 25.01.2020
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 9/2020
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-04689-y

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2020

Nuclear medicine services after COVID-19: gearing up back to normality

Coming back to the normal clinic: how has COVID-19 changed us?

Initial experience with [18F]DPA-714 TSPO-PET to image inflammation in primary angiitis of the central nervous system

Spatial patterns of tau deposition are associated with amyloid, ApoE, sex, and cognitive decline in older adults

Imaging phenotype using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography–based radiomics and genetic alterations of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Slice-selective learning for Alzheimer’s disease classification using a generative adversarial network: a feasibility study of external validation