Cargando…
Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies
INTRODUCTION: Quantitative in vivo measurement of brain amyloid burden is important for both research and clinical purposes. However, the existence of multiple imaging tracers presents challenges to the interpretation of such measurements. This study presents a direct comparison of Pittsburgh compou...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6389727/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30847382 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dadm.2018.12.008 |
_version_ | 1783397990087524352 |
---|---|
author | Su, Yi Flores, Shaney Wang, Guoqiao Hornbeck, Russ C. Speidel, Benjamin Joseph-Mathurin, Nelly Vlassenko, Andrei G. Gordon, Brian A. Koeppe, Robert A. Klunk, William E. Jack, Clifford R. Farlow, Martin R. Salloway, Stephen Snider, Barbara J. Berman, Sarah B. Roberson, Erik D. Brosch, Jared Jimenez-Velazques, Ivonne van Dyck, Christopher H. Galasko, Douglas Yuan, Shauna H. Jayadev, Suman Honig, Lawrence S. Gauthier, Serge Hsiung, Ging-Yuek R. Masellis, Mario Brooks, William S. Fulham, Michael Clarnette, Roger Masters, Colin L. Wallon, David Hannequin, Didier Dubois, Bruno Pariente, Jeremie Sanchez-Valle, Raquel Mummery, Catherine Ringman, John M. Bottlaender, Michel Klein, Gregory Milosavljevic-Ristic, Smiljana McDade, Eric Xiong, Chengjie Morris, John C. Bateman, Randall J. Benzinger, Tammie L.S. |
author_facet | Su, Yi Flores, Shaney Wang, Guoqiao Hornbeck, Russ C. Speidel, Benjamin Joseph-Mathurin, Nelly Vlassenko, Andrei G. Gordon, Brian A. Koeppe, Robert A. Klunk, William E. Jack, Clifford R. Farlow, Martin R. Salloway, Stephen Snider, Barbara J. Berman, Sarah B. Roberson, Erik D. Brosch, Jared Jimenez-Velazques, Ivonne van Dyck, Christopher H. Galasko, Douglas Yuan, Shauna H. Jayadev, Suman Honig, Lawrence S. Gauthier, Serge Hsiung, Ging-Yuek R. Masellis, Mario Brooks, William S. Fulham, Michael Clarnette, Roger Masters, Colin L. Wallon, David Hannequin, Didier Dubois, Bruno Pariente, Jeremie Sanchez-Valle, Raquel Mummery, Catherine Ringman, John M. Bottlaender, Michel Klein, Gregory Milosavljevic-Ristic, Smiljana McDade, Eric Xiong, Chengjie Morris, John C. Bateman, Randall J. Benzinger, Tammie L.S. |
author_sort | Su, Yi |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Quantitative in vivo measurement of brain amyloid burden is important for both research and clinical purposes. However, the existence of multiple imaging tracers presents challenges to the interpretation of such measurements. This study presents a direct comparison of Pittsburgh compound B–based and florbetapir-based amyloid imaging in the same participants from two independent cohorts using a crossover design. METHODS: Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir amyloid PET imaging data from three different cohorts were analyzed using previously established pipelines to obtain global amyloid burden measurements. These measurements were converted to the Centiloid scale to allow fair comparison between the two tracers. The mean and inter-individual variability of the two tracers were compared using multivariate linear models both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. RESULTS: Global amyloid burden measured using the two tracers were strongly correlated in both cohorts. However, higher variability was observed when florbetapir was used as the imaging tracer. The variability may be partially caused by white matter signal as partial volume correction reduces the variability and improves the correlations between the two tracers. Amyloid burden measured using both tracers was found to be in association with clinical and psychometric measurements. Longitudinal comparison of the two tracers was also performed in similar but separate cohorts whose baseline amyloid load was considered elevated (i.e., amyloid positive). No significant difference was detected in the average annualized rate of change measurements made with these two tracers. DISCUSSION: Although the amyloid burden measurements were quite similar using these two tracers as expected, difference was observable even after conversion into the Centiloid scale. Further investigation is warranted to identify optimal strategies to harmonize amyloid imaging data acquired using different tracers. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6389727 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63897272019-03-07 Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies Su, Yi Flores, Shaney Wang, Guoqiao Hornbeck, Russ C. Speidel, Benjamin Joseph-Mathurin, Nelly Vlassenko, Andrei G. Gordon, Brian A. Koeppe, Robert A. Klunk, William E. Jack, Clifford R. Farlow, Martin R. Salloway, Stephen Snider, Barbara J. Berman, Sarah B. Roberson, Erik D. Brosch, Jared Jimenez-Velazques, Ivonne van Dyck, Christopher H. Galasko, Douglas Yuan, Shauna H. Jayadev, Suman Honig, Lawrence S. Gauthier, Serge Hsiung, Ging-Yuek R. Masellis, Mario Brooks, William S. Fulham, Michael Clarnette, Roger Masters, Colin L. Wallon, David Hannequin, Didier Dubois, Bruno Pariente, Jeremie Sanchez-Valle, Raquel Mummery, Catherine Ringman, John M. Bottlaender, Michel Klein, Gregory Milosavljevic-Ristic, Smiljana McDade, Eric Xiong, Chengjie Morris, John C. Bateman, Randall J. Benzinger, Tammie L.S. Alzheimers Dement (Amst) Neuroimaging INTRODUCTION: Quantitative in vivo measurement of brain amyloid burden is important for both research and clinical purposes. However, the existence of multiple imaging tracers presents challenges to the interpretation of such measurements. This study presents a direct comparison of Pittsburgh compound B–based and florbetapir-based amyloid imaging in the same participants from two independent cohorts using a crossover design. METHODS: Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir amyloid PET imaging data from three different cohorts were analyzed using previously established pipelines to obtain global amyloid burden measurements. These measurements were converted to the Centiloid scale to allow fair comparison between the two tracers. The mean and inter-individual variability of the two tracers were compared using multivariate linear models both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. RESULTS: Global amyloid burden measured using the two tracers were strongly correlated in both cohorts. However, higher variability was observed when florbetapir was used as the imaging tracer. The variability may be partially caused by white matter signal as partial volume correction reduces the variability and improves the correlations between the two tracers. Amyloid burden measured using both tracers was found to be in association with clinical and psychometric measurements. Longitudinal comparison of the two tracers was also performed in similar but separate cohorts whose baseline amyloid load was considered elevated (i.e., amyloid positive). No significant difference was detected in the average annualized rate of change measurements made with these two tracers. DISCUSSION: Although the amyloid burden measurements were quite similar using these two tracers as expected, difference was observable even after conversion into the Centiloid scale. Further investigation is warranted to identify optimal strategies to harmonize amyloid imaging data acquired using different tracers. Elsevier 2019-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6389727/ /pubmed/30847382 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dadm.2018.12.008 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Neuroimaging Su, Yi Flores, Shaney Wang, Guoqiao Hornbeck, Russ C. Speidel, Benjamin Joseph-Mathurin, Nelly Vlassenko, Andrei G. Gordon, Brian A. Koeppe, Robert A. Klunk, William E. Jack, Clifford R. Farlow, Martin R. Salloway, Stephen Snider, Barbara J. Berman, Sarah B. Roberson, Erik D. Brosch, Jared Jimenez-Velazques, Ivonne van Dyck, Christopher H. Galasko, Douglas Yuan, Shauna H. Jayadev, Suman Honig, Lawrence S. Gauthier, Serge Hsiung, Ging-Yuek R. Masellis, Mario Brooks, William S. Fulham, Michael Clarnette, Roger Masters, Colin L. Wallon, David Hannequin, Didier Dubois, Bruno Pariente, Jeremie Sanchez-Valle, Raquel Mummery, Catherine Ringman, John M. Bottlaender, Michel Klein, Gregory Milosavljevic-Ristic, Smiljana McDade, Eric Xiong, Chengjie Morris, John C. Bateman, Randall J. Benzinger, Tammie L.S. Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies |
title | Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies |
title_full | Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies |
title_short | Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies |
title_sort | comparison of pittsburgh compound b and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies |
topic | Neuroimaging |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6389727/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30847382 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dadm.2018.12.008 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT suyi comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT floresshaney comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT wangguoqiao comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT hornbeckrussc comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT speidelbenjamin comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT josephmathurinnelly comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT vlassenkoandreig comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT gordonbriana comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT koepperoberta comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT klunkwilliame comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT jackcliffordr comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT farlowmartinr comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT sallowaystephen comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT sniderbarbaraj comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT bermansarahb comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT robersonerikd comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT broschjared comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT jimenezvelazquesivonne comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT vandyckchristopherh comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT galaskodouglas comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT yuanshaunah comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT jayadevsuman comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT honiglawrences comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT gauthierserge comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT hsiunggingyuekr comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT masellismario comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT brookswilliams comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT fulhammichael comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT clarnetteroger comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT masterscolinl comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT wallondavid comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT hannequindidier comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT duboisbruno comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT parientejeremie comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT sanchezvalleraquel comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT mummerycatherine comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT ringmanjohnm comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT bottlaendermichel comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT kleingregory comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT milosavljevicristicsmiljana comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT mcdadeeric comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT xiongchengjie comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT morrisjohnc comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT batemanrandallj comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies AT benzingertammiels comparisonofpittsburghcompoundbandflorbetapirincrosssectionalandlongitudinalstudies |