Comparison of dual-biomarker PIB-PET and dual-tracer PET in AD diagnosis

28Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objectives: To identify the optimal time window for capturing perfusion information from early 11C-PIB imaging frames (perfusion PIB, 11C-pPIB) and to compare the performance of 18F-FDG PET and "dual biomarker" 11C-PIB PET [11C-pPIB and amyloid PIB (11C-aPIB)] for classification of AD, MCI and CN subjects. Methods: Forty subjects (14 CN, 12 MCI and 14 AD patients) underwent 18F-FDG and 11C-PIB PET studies. Pearson correlation between the 18F-FDG image and sum of early 11C-PIB frames was maximised to identify the optimal time window for 11C-pPIB. The classification power of imaging parameters was evaluated with a leave-one-out validation. Results: A 7-min time window yielded the highest correlation between 18F-FDG and 11C-pPIB. 11C-pPIB and 18F-FDG images shared a similar radioactive distribution pattern. 18F-FDG performed better than 11C-pPIB for the classification of both AD vs. CN and MCI vs. CN. 11C-pPIB + 11C-aPIB and 18F-FDG + 11C-aPIB yielded the highest classification accuracy for the classification of AD vs. CN, and 18F-FDG + 11C-aPIB had the best classification performance for the classification of MCI vs. CN. Conclusion: C-pPIB could serve as a useful biomarker of rCBF for measuring neural activity and improve the diagnostic power of PET for AD in conjunction with 11C-aPIB. 18F-FDG and 11C-PIB dual-tracer PET examination could better detect MCI.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fu, L., Liu, L., Zhang, J., Xu, B., Fan, Y., & Tian, J. (2014). Comparison of dual-biomarker PIB-PET and dual-tracer PET in AD diagnosis. European Radiology, 24(11), 2800–2809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3311-x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free