Division of Neuroscience, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Campus, London, UK.
Neuroimage. 2013 Apr 15;70:423-33. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.12.014. Epub 2012 Dec 20.
[(11)C]Pittsburgh compound-B (PIB) has been the most widely used positron emission tomography (PET) imaging agent for brain amyloid. Several longitudinal studies evaluating the progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and numerous therapeutic intervention studies are underway using [(11)C]PIB PET as an AD biomarker. Quantitative analysis of [(11)C]PIB data requires the definition of regional volumes of interest. This investigation systematically compared two data analysis routes both using a probabilistic brain atlas with 11 bilateral regions. Route 1 used individually segmented structural magnetic resonance images (MRI) for each subject while Route 2 used a standardised [(11)C]PIB PET template.
A total of 54 subjects, 20 with probable Alzheimer's disease (AD), 14 with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and 20 age-matched healthy controls, were scanned at two imaging centres either in London (UK) or in Turku (Finland). For all subjects structural volumetric MRI and [(11)C]PIB PET scans were acquired. Target-to-cerebellum ratios 40 min to 60 min post injection were used as outcome measures. Regional read outs for grey matter target regions were generated for both routes. Based on a composite neocortical, frontal, posterior cingulate, combined posterior cingulate and frontal cortical regions, scans were categorised into either 'PIB negative' (PIB-) or 'PIB positive' (PIB+) using previously reported cut-off target-to-cerebellar ratios of 1.41, 1.5 and 1.6, respectively.
Target-to-cerebellum ratios were greater when defined with a [(11)C]PIB PET template than with individual MRIs for all cortical regions regardless of diagnosis. This difference was highly significant for controls (p<0.001, paired samples t-test), less significant for MCIs and borderline for ADs. Assignment of subjects to raised or normal categories was the same with both routes with a 1.6 cut-off while with lower cut off using frontal cortex, and combined frontal cortex and posterior cingulate demonstrated similar results, while posterior cingulate alone demonstrated significantly higher proportion of controls as amyloid positive by Route 2.
Definition of cortical grey matter regions is more accurate when individually segmented MRIs (Route 1) were used rather than a population-based PET template (Route 2). The impact of this difference depends on the grey-to-white matter contrast in the PET images; specifically seen in healthy controls with high white matter and low grey matter uptake. When classifying AD, MCI and control subjects as normal or abnormal using large cortical regions; discordance was found between the MRI and template approach for those few subjects who presented with cortex-to-cerebellum ratios very close to the pre-assigned cut-off. However, posterior cingulate alone demonstrated significant discordance in healthy controls using template based approach. This study, therefore, demonstrates that the use of a [(11)C]PIB PET template (Route 2) is adequate for clinical diagnostic purposes, while MRI based analysis (Route 1) remains more appropriate for clinical research.
[(11)C]匹兹堡化合物-B(PIB)一直是最广泛用于脑淀粉样蛋白的正电子发射断层扫描(PET)成像剂。有几项评估阿尔茨海默病(AD)进展的纵向研究,以及许多正在进行的治疗干预研究都使用[(11)C]PIB PET 作为 AD 生物标志物。[(11)C]PIB 数据的定量分析需要定义感兴趣的区域体积。本研究系统比较了两种数据分析路径,均使用具有 11 个双侧区域的概率性脑图谱。路径 1 使用每个受试者的单独分割结构磁共振图像(MRI),而路径 2 使用标准化的[(11)C]PIB PET 模板。
共有 54 名受试者,20 名患有可能的阿尔茨海默病(AD),14 名患有遗忘型轻度认知障碍(MCI),20 名年龄匹配的健康对照者,在伦敦(英国)或图尔库(芬兰)的两个影像中心进行扫描。所有受试者均进行了结构容积 MRI 和[(11)C]PIB PET 扫描。注射后 40 分钟至 60 分钟的靶标与小脑的比率被用作结局指标。为两条路径生成了用于灰质靶区的区域读出。基于复合新皮质、额叶、后扣带回、后扣带和额皮质联合区域,根据先前报道的 1.41、1.5 和 1.6 的靶标与小脑的比值,将扫描分为“PIB 阴性(PIB-)”或“PIB 阳性(PIB+)”。
对于所有皮质区域,无论诊断如何,使用[(11)C]PIB PET 模板定义的靶标与小脑的比率均大于使用单独 MRI 的定义。对于对照组,这一差异具有高度显著性(p<0.001,配对样本 t 检验),对于 MCI 组则不太显著,对于 AD 组则具有边缘显著性。使用 1.6 截止值时,两条路径的结果相同,而使用较低的截止值(额叶)和使用额皮质和后扣带联合时,结果相似,而仅后扣带则显示使用路径 2 时,健康对照组中有更多的淀粉样蛋白阳性患者。
当使用单独分割的 MRI(路径 1)而不是基于人群的 PET 模板(路径 2)定义皮质灰质区域时,皮质灰质区域的定义更为准确。这种差异的影响取决于 PET 图像中的灰质与白质对比;在灰质摄取量高而白质摄取量低的健康对照组中尤为明显。当使用大皮质区域将 AD、MCI 和对照组受试者分类为正常或异常时,MRI 和模板方法之间存在一些受试者的差异,这些受试者的皮质与小脑的比值非常接近预先指定的截止值。然而,仅后扣带在使用基于模板的方法时在健康对照组中存在显著差异。因此,本研究表明,使用[(11)C]PIB PET 模板(路径 2)足以用于临床诊断目的,而基于 MRI 的分析(路径 1)仍然更适合临床研究。