Cargando…
A potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)F] FDOPA PET imaging approach
[(18)F]FDOPA PET imaging has shown dopaminergic function indexed as K(i)(cer) differs between antipsychotic treatment responders and non-responders. However, the theragnostic potential of this biomarker to identify non-responders has yet to be evaluated. In view of this, we aimed to evaluate this as...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8115068/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32961543 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41386-020-00866-7 |
_version_ | 1783691168390840320 |
---|---|
author | Veronese, Mattia Santangelo, Barbara Jauhar, Sameer D’Ambrosio, Enrico Demjaha, Arsime Salimbeni, Hugh Huajie, Jin McCrone, Paul Turkheimer, Federico Howes, Oliver |
author_facet | Veronese, Mattia Santangelo, Barbara Jauhar, Sameer D’Ambrosio, Enrico Demjaha, Arsime Salimbeni, Hugh Huajie, Jin McCrone, Paul Turkheimer, Federico Howes, Oliver |
author_sort | Veronese, Mattia |
collection | PubMed |
description | [(18)F]FDOPA PET imaging has shown dopaminergic function indexed as K(i)(cer) differs between antipsychotic treatment responders and non-responders. However, the theragnostic potential of this biomarker to identify non-responders has yet to be evaluated. In view of this, we aimed to evaluate this as a theragnostic test using linear and non-linear machine-learning (i.e., Bernoulli, support vector, random forest and Gaussian processes) analyses and to develop and evaluate a simplified approach, standardised uptake value ratio (SUVRc). Both [(18)F]FDOPA PET approaches had good test-rest reproducibility across striatal regions (K(i)(cer) ICC: 0.68–0.94, SUVRc ICC: 0.76–0.91). Both our linear and non-linear classification models showed good predictive power to distinguish responders from non-responders (receiver operating curve area under the curve for region-of-interest approach: K(i)(cer) = 0.80, SUVRc = 0.79; for voxel-wise approach using a linear support vector machine: 0.88) and similar sensitivity for identifying treatment non-responders with 100% specificity (K(i)(cer): ~50%, SUVRc: 40–60%). Although the findings were replicated in two independent datasets, given the total sample size (n = 84) and single setting, they warrant testing in other samples and settings. Preliminary economic analysis of [(18)F]FDOPA PET to fast-track treatment-resistant patients with schizophrenia to clozapine indicated a potential healthcare cost saving of ~£3400 (equivalent to $4232 USD) per patient. These findings indicate [(18)F]FDOPA PET dopamine imaging has potential as biomarker to guide treatment choice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8115068 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81150682021-05-12 A potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)F] FDOPA PET imaging approach Veronese, Mattia Santangelo, Barbara Jauhar, Sameer D’Ambrosio, Enrico Demjaha, Arsime Salimbeni, Hugh Huajie, Jin McCrone, Paul Turkheimer, Federico Howes, Oliver Neuropsychopharmacology Article [(18)F]FDOPA PET imaging has shown dopaminergic function indexed as K(i)(cer) differs between antipsychotic treatment responders and non-responders. However, the theragnostic potential of this biomarker to identify non-responders has yet to be evaluated. In view of this, we aimed to evaluate this as a theragnostic test using linear and non-linear machine-learning (i.e., Bernoulli, support vector, random forest and Gaussian processes) analyses and to develop and evaluate a simplified approach, standardised uptake value ratio (SUVRc). Both [(18)F]FDOPA PET approaches had good test-rest reproducibility across striatal regions (K(i)(cer) ICC: 0.68–0.94, SUVRc ICC: 0.76–0.91). Both our linear and non-linear classification models showed good predictive power to distinguish responders from non-responders (receiver operating curve area under the curve for region-of-interest approach: K(i)(cer) = 0.80, SUVRc = 0.79; for voxel-wise approach using a linear support vector machine: 0.88) and similar sensitivity for identifying treatment non-responders with 100% specificity (K(i)(cer): ~50%, SUVRc: 40–60%). Although the findings were replicated in two independent datasets, given the total sample size (n = 84) and single setting, they warrant testing in other samples and settings. Preliminary economic analysis of [(18)F]FDOPA PET to fast-track treatment-resistant patients with schizophrenia to clozapine indicated a potential healthcare cost saving of ~£3400 (equivalent to $4232 USD) per patient. These findings indicate [(18)F]FDOPA PET dopamine imaging has potential as biomarker to guide treatment choice. Springer International Publishing 2020-09-22 2021-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8115068/ /pubmed/32961543 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41386-020-00866-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Veronese, Mattia Santangelo, Barbara Jauhar, Sameer D’Ambrosio, Enrico Demjaha, Arsime Salimbeni, Hugh Huajie, Jin McCrone, Paul Turkheimer, Federico Howes, Oliver A potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)F] FDOPA PET imaging approach |
title | A potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)F] FDOPA PET imaging approach |
title_full | A potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)F] FDOPA PET imaging approach |
title_fullStr | A potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)F] FDOPA PET imaging approach |
title_full_unstemmed | A potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)F] FDOPA PET imaging approach |
title_short | A potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)F] FDOPA PET imaging approach |
title_sort | potential biomarker for treatment stratification in psychosis: evaluation of an [(18)f] fdopa pet imaging approach |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8115068/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32961543 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41386-020-00866-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT veronesemattia apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT santangelobarbara apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT jauharsameer apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT dambrosioenrico apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT demjahaarsime apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT salimbenihugh apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT huajiejin apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT mccronepaul apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT turkheimerfederico apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT howesoliver apotentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT veronesemattia potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT santangelobarbara potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT jauharsameer potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT dambrosioenrico potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT demjahaarsime potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT salimbenihugh potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT huajiejin potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT mccronepaul potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT turkheimerfederico potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach AT howesoliver potentialbiomarkerfortreatmentstratificationinpsychosisevaluationofan18ffdopapetimagingapproach |