Cargando…
Utilizing the Centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal PiB PET studies
Amyloid imaging is a valuable tool for research and diagnosis in dementing disorders. Successful use of this tool is limited by the lack of a common standard in the quantification of amyloid imaging data. The Centiloid approach was recently proposed to address this problem and in this work, we repor...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6051499/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30035025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2018.04.022 |
_version_ | 1783340536944394240 |
---|---|
author | Su, Yi Flores, Shaney Hornbeck, Russ C. Speidel, Benjamin Vlassenko, Andrei G. Gordon, Brian A. Koeppe, Robert A. Klunk, William E. Xiong, Chengjie Morris, John C. Benzinger, Tammie L.S. |
author_facet | Su, Yi Flores, Shaney Hornbeck, Russ C. Speidel, Benjamin Vlassenko, Andrei G. Gordon, Brian A. Koeppe, Robert A. Klunk, William E. Xiong, Chengjie Morris, John C. Benzinger, Tammie L.S. |
author_sort | Su, Yi |
collection | PubMed |
description | Amyloid imaging is a valuable tool for research and diagnosis in dementing disorders. Successful use of this tool is limited by the lack of a common standard in the quantification of amyloid imaging data. The Centiloid approach was recently proposed to address this problem and in this work, we report our implementation of this approach and evaluate the impact of differences in underlying image analysis methodologies using both cross-sectional and longitudinal datasets. The Centiloid approach successfully converts quantitative amyloid burden measurements into a common Centiloid scale (CL) and comparable dynamic range. As expected, the Centiloid values derived from different analytical approaches inherit some of the inherent benefits and drawbacks of the underlying approaches, and these differences result in statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences in the variability and group mean values. Because of these differences, even after expression in CL, the 95% specificity amyloid positivity thresholds derived from different analytic approaches varied from 5.7 CL to 11.9 CL, and the reliable worsening threshold varied from −2.0 CL to 11.0 CL. Although this difference is in part due to the dependency of the threshold determination methodology on the statistical characteristics of the measurements. When amyloid measurements obtained from different centers are combined for analysis, one should not expect Centiloid conversion to eliminate all the differences in amyloid burden measurements due to variabilities in underlying acquisition protocols and analysis techniques. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6051499 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60514992018-07-20 Utilizing the Centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal PiB PET studies Su, Yi Flores, Shaney Hornbeck, Russ C. Speidel, Benjamin Vlassenko, Andrei G. Gordon, Brian A. Koeppe, Robert A. Klunk, William E. Xiong, Chengjie Morris, John C. Benzinger, Tammie L.S. Neuroimage Clin Regular Article Amyloid imaging is a valuable tool for research and diagnosis in dementing disorders. Successful use of this tool is limited by the lack of a common standard in the quantification of amyloid imaging data. The Centiloid approach was recently proposed to address this problem and in this work, we report our implementation of this approach and evaluate the impact of differences in underlying image analysis methodologies using both cross-sectional and longitudinal datasets. The Centiloid approach successfully converts quantitative amyloid burden measurements into a common Centiloid scale (CL) and comparable dynamic range. As expected, the Centiloid values derived from different analytical approaches inherit some of the inherent benefits and drawbacks of the underlying approaches, and these differences result in statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences in the variability and group mean values. Because of these differences, even after expression in CL, the 95% specificity amyloid positivity thresholds derived from different analytic approaches varied from 5.7 CL to 11.9 CL, and the reliable worsening threshold varied from −2.0 CL to 11.0 CL. Although this difference is in part due to the dependency of the threshold determination methodology on the statistical characteristics of the measurements. When amyloid measurements obtained from different centers are combined for analysis, one should not expect Centiloid conversion to eliminate all the differences in amyloid burden measurements due to variabilities in underlying acquisition protocols and analysis techniques. Elsevier 2018-04-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6051499/ /pubmed/30035025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2018.04.022 Text en © 2018 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Regular Article Su, Yi Flores, Shaney Hornbeck, Russ C. Speidel, Benjamin Vlassenko, Andrei G. Gordon, Brian A. Koeppe, Robert A. Klunk, William E. Xiong, Chengjie Morris, John C. Benzinger, Tammie L.S. Utilizing the Centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal PiB PET studies |
title | Utilizing the Centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal PiB PET studies |
title_full | Utilizing the Centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal PiB PET studies |
title_fullStr | Utilizing the Centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal PiB PET studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Utilizing the Centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal PiB PET studies |
title_short | Utilizing the Centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal PiB PET studies |
title_sort | utilizing the centiloid scale in cross-sectional and longitudinal pib pet studies |
topic | Regular Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6051499/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30035025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2018.04.022 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT suyi utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT floresshaney utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT hornbeckrussc utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT speidelbenjamin utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT vlassenkoandreig utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT gordonbriana utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT koepperoberta utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT klunkwilliame utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT xiongchengjie utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT morrisjohnc utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies AT benzingertammiels utilizingthecentiloidscaleincrosssectionalandlongitudinalpibpetstudies |