Advanced

Test–retest repeatability of [18F]Flortaucipir PET in Alzheimer’s disease and cognitively normal individuals

Timmers, Tessa ; Ossenkoppele, Rik LU ; Visser, Denise ; Tuncel, Hayel ; Wolters, Emma E. ; Verfaillie, Sander C.J. ; van der Flier, Wiesje M. ; Boellaard, Ronald ; Golla, Sandeep S.V. and van Berckel, Bart N.M. (2019) In Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism
Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the test–retest (TRT) repeatability of various parametric quantification methods for [18F]Flortaucipir positron emission tomography (PET). We included eight subjects with dementia or mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease and six cognitively normal subjects. All underwent two 130-min dynamic [18F]Flortaucipir PET scans within 3 ± 1 weeks. Data were analyzed using reference region models receptor parametric mapping (RPM), simplified reference tissue method 2 (SRTM2) and reference logan (RLogan), as well as standardized uptake value ratios (SUVr, time intervals 40–60, 80–100 and 110–130 min post-injection) with cerebellar gray matter as reference region. We... (More)

The aim of this study was to investigate the test–retest (TRT) repeatability of various parametric quantification methods for [18F]Flortaucipir positron emission tomography (PET). We included eight subjects with dementia or mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease and six cognitively normal subjects. All underwent two 130-min dynamic [18F]Flortaucipir PET scans within 3 ± 1 weeks. Data were analyzed using reference region models receptor parametric mapping (RPM), simplified reference tissue method 2 (SRTM2) and reference logan (RLogan), as well as standardized uptake value ratios (SUVr, time intervals 40–60, 80–100 and 110–130 min post-injection) with cerebellar gray matter as reference region. We obtained distribution volume ratio or SUVr, first for all brain regions and then in three tau-specific regions-of-interest (ROIs). TRT repeatability (%) was defined as |retest–test|/(average (test + retest)) × 100. For all methods and across ROIs, TRT repeatability ranged from (median (IQR)) 0.84% (0.68–2.15) to 6.84% (2.99–11.50). TRT repeatability was good for all reference methods used, although semi-quantitative models (i.e. SUVr) performed marginally worse than quantitative models, for instance TRT repeatability of RPM: 1.98% (0.78–3.58) vs. SUVr80–100: 3.05% (1.28–5.52), p < 0.001. Furthermore, for SUVr80–100 and SUVr110–130, with higher average SUVr, more variation was observed. In conclusion, while TRT repeatability was good for all models used, quantitative methods performed slightly better than semi-quantitative methods.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
epub
subject
keywords
Alzheimer’s disease, parametric methods, test–retest repeatability, [F]Flortaucipir
in
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism
publisher
Nature Publishing Group
external identifiers
  • pmid:31575335
  • scopus:85074556121
ISSN
0271-678X
DOI
10.1177/0271678X19879226
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
ad5b38ea-f565-4d7f-94f4-7c3dff0c02bd
date added to LUP
2019-11-25 12:28:58
date last changed
2020-02-26 07:38:52
@article{ad5b38ea-f565-4d7f-94f4-7c3dff0c02bd,
  abstract     = {<p>The aim of this study was to investigate the test–retest (TRT) repeatability of various parametric quantification methods for [<sup>18</sup>F]Flortaucipir positron emission tomography (PET). We included eight subjects with dementia or mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease and six cognitively normal subjects. All underwent two 130-min dynamic [<sup>18</sup>F]Flortaucipir PET scans within 3 ± 1 weeks. Data were analyzed using reference region models receptor parametric mapping (RPM), simplified reference tissue method 2 (SRTM2) and reference logan (RLogan), as well as standardized uptake value ratios (SUVr, time intervals 40–60, 80–100 and 110–130 min post-injection) with cerebellar gray matter as reference region. We obtained distribution volume ratio or SUVr, first for all brain regions and then in three tau-specific regions-of-interest (ROIs). TRT repeatability (%) was defined as |retest–test|/(average (test + retest)) × 100. For all methods and across ROIs, TRT repeatability ranged from (median (IQR)) 0.84% (0.68–2.15) to 6.84% (2.99–11.50). TRT repeatability was good for all reference methods used, although semi-quantitative models (i.e. SUVr) performed marginally worse than quantitative models, for instance TRT repeatability of RPM: 1.98% (0.78–3.58) vs. SUVr<sub>80–100</sub>: 3.05% (1.28–5.52), p &lt; 0.001. Furthermore, for SUVr<sub>80–100</sub> and SUVr<sub>110–130</sub>, with higher average SUVr, more variation was observed. In conclusion, while TRT repeatability was good for all models used, quantitative methods performed slightly better than semi-quantitative methods.</p>},
  author       = {Timmers, Tessa and Ossenkoppele, Rik and Visser, Denise and Tuncel, Hayel and Wolters, Emma E. and Verfaillie, Sander C.J. and van der Flier, Wiesje M. and Boellaard, Ronald and Golla, Sandeep S.V. and van Berckel, Bart N.M.},
  issn         = {0271-678X},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {10},
  publisher    = {Nature Publishing Group},
  series       = {Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism},
  title        = {Test–retest repeatability of [<sup>18</sup>F]Flortaucipir PET in Alzheimer’s disease and cognitively normal individuals},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0271678X19879226},
  doi          = {10.1177/0271678X19879226},
  year         = {2019},
}