Suppr超能文献

双时窗 [F]氟替美莫和 [F]氟比洛芬的参数成像研究。

Parametric imaging of dual-time window [F]flutemetamol and [F]florbetaben studies.

机构信息

Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam Neuroscience, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam Neuroscience, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Neuroimage. 2021 Jul 1;234:117953. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.117953. Epub 2021 Mar 21.

Abstract

Optimal pharmacokinetic models for quantifying amyloid beta (Aβ) burden using both [F]flutemetamol and [F]florbetaben scans have previously been identified at a region of interest (ROI) level. The purpose of this study was to determine optimal quantitative methods for parametric analyses of [F]flutemetamol and [F]florbetaben scans. Forty-six participants were scanned on a PET/MR scanner using a dual-time window protocol and either [F]flutemetamol (N=24) or [F]florbetaben (N=22). The following parametric approaches were used to derive DVR estimates: reference Logan (RLogan), receptor parametric mapping (RPM), two-step simplified reference tissue model (SRTM2) and multilinear reference tissue models (MRTM0, MRTM1, MRTM2), all with cerebellar grey matter as reference tissue. In addition, a standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) was calculated for the 90-110 min post injection interval. All parametric images were assessed visually. Regional outcome measures were compared with those from a validated ROI method, i.e. DVR derived using RLogan. Visually, RPM, and SRTM2 performed best across tracers and, in addition to SUVR, provided highest AUC values for differentiating between Aβ-positive vs Aβ-negative scans ([F]flutemetamol: range AUC=0.96-0.97 [F]florbetaben: range AUC=0.83-0.85). Outcome parameters of most methods were highly correlated with the reference method (R≥0.87), while lowest correlation were observed for MRTM2 (R=0.71-0.80). Furthermore, bias was low (≤5%) and independent of underlying amyloid burden for MRTM0 and MRTM1. The optimal parametric method differed per evaluated aspect; however, the best compromise across aspects was found for MRTM0 followed by SRTM2, for both tracers. SRTM2 is the preferred method for parametric imaging because, in addition to its good performance, it has the advantage of providing a measure of relative perfusion (R), which is useful for measuring disease progression.

摘要

先前已经在感兴趣区域(ROI)水平上确定了用于量化淀粉样蛋白β(Aβ)负担的[F]flutemetamol 和 [F]florbetaben 扫描的最佳药代动力学模型。本研究的目的是确定用于[F]flutemetamol 和 [F]florbetaben 扫描的参数分析的最佳定量方法。46 名参与者在 PET/MR 扫描仪上使用双时窗方案进行扫描,其中[F]flutemetamol(N=24)或[F]florbetaben(N=22)。使用以下参数方法来推导出 DVR 估计值:参考 Logan(RLogan)、受体参数映射(RPM)、两步简化参考组织模型(SRTM2)和多线性参考组织模型(MRTM0、MRTM1、MRTM2),均以小脑灰质为参考组织。此外,还计算了 90-110 分钟注射后间隔的标准化摄取值比(SUVR)。所有参数图像均进行了视觉评估。区域结果测量值与使用验证的 ROI 方法(即使用 RLogan 推导的 DVR)进行了比较。从视觉上看,RPM 和 SRTM2 在所有示踪剂中表现最佳,并且除了 SUVR 之外,还为区分 Aβ 阳性与 Aβ 阴性扫描提供了最高的 AUC 值([F]flutemetamol:范围 AUC=0.96-0.97 [F]florbetaben:范围 AUC=0.83-0.85)。大多数方法的结果参数与参考方法高度相关(R≥0.87),而 MRTM2 观察到的相关性最低(R=0.71-0.80)。此外,MRTM0 和 MRTM1 的偏差较低(≤5%),并且与基础淀粉样蛋白负担无关。最佳参数方法因评估方面而异;然而,对于两种示踪剂,最优折衷方案是 MRTM0 随后是 SRTM2。SRTM2 是参数成像的首选方法,因为除了性能良好外,它还提供了相对灌注(R)的测量值,这对于测量疾病进展很有用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验