Impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on SUVR bias
Abstract Background Despite its widespread use, the semi-quantitative standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) may be biased compared with the distribution volume ratio (DVR). This bias may be partially explained by changes in cerebral blood flow (CBF) and is likely to be also dependent on the extent...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2022-05-01
|
| Series: | EJNMMI Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-022-00898-8 |
| _version_ | 1818203035431600128 |
|---|---|
| author | Fiona Heeman Maqsood Yaqub Janine Hendriks Bart N. M. van Berckel Lyduine E. Collij Katherine R. Gray Richard Manber Robin Wolz Valentina Garibotto Catriona Wimberley Craig Ritchie Frederik Barkhof Juan Domingo Gispert David Vállez García Isadora Lopes Alves Adriaan A. Lammertsma on behalf of the AMYPAD Consortium |
| author_facet | Fiona Heeman Maqsood Yaqub Janine Hendriks Bart N. M. van Berckel Lyduine E. Collij Katherine R. Gray Richard Manber Robin Wolz Valentina Garibotto Catriona Wimberley Craig Ritchie Frederik Barkhof Juan Domingo Gispert David Vállez García Isadora Lopes Alves Adriaan A. Lammertsma on behalf of the AMYPAD Consortium |
| author_sort | Fiona Heeman |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Despite its widespread use, the semi-quantitative standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) may be biased compared with the distribution volume ratio (DVR). This bias may be partially explained by changes in cerebral blood flow (CBF) and is likely to be also dependent on the extent of the underlying amyloid-β (Aβ) burden. This study aimed to compare SUVR with DVR and to evaluate the effects of underlying Aβ burden and CBF on bias in SUVR in mainly cognitively unimpaired participants. Participants were scanned according to a dual-time window protocol, with either [18F]flutemetamol (N = 90) or [18F]florbetaben (N = 31). The validated basisfunction-based implementation of the two-step simplified reference tissue model was used to derive DVR and R 1 parametric images, and SUVR was calculated from 90 to 110 min post-injection, all with the cerebellar grey matter as reference tissue. First, linear regression and Bland–Altman analyses were used to compare (regional) SUVR with DVR. Then, generalized linear models were applied to evaluate whether (bias in) SUVR relative to DVR could be explained by R 1 for the global cortical average (GCA), precuneus, posterior cingulate, and orbitofrontal region. Results Despite high correlations (GCA: R 2 ≥ 0.85), large overestimation and proportional bias of SUVR relative to DVR was observed. Negative associations were observed between both SUVR or SUVRbias and R 1, albeit non-significant. Conclusion The present findings demonstrate that bias in SUVR relative to DVR is strongly related to underlying Aβ burden. Furthermore, in a cohort consisting mainly of cognitively unimpaired individuals, the effect of relative CBF on bias in SUVR appears limited. EudraCT Number: 2018-002277-22, registered on: 25-06-2018. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-12T03:18:56Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-3719a1fba4d443faa2e3f243c084473b |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2191-219X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-12T03:18:56Z |
| publishDate | 2022-05-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | EJNMMI Research |
| spelling | doaj.art-3719a1fba4d443faa2e3f243c084473b2022-12-22T00:40:13ZengSpringerOpenEJNMMI Research2191-219X2022-05-0112111010.1186/s13550-022-00898-8Impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on SUVR biasFiona Heeman0Maqsood Yaqub1Janine Hendriks2Bart N. M. van Berckel3Lyduine E. Collij4Katherine R. Gray5Richard Manber6Robin Wolz7Valentina Garibotto8Catriona Wimberley9Craig Ritchie10Frederik Barkhof11Juan Domingo Gispert12David Vállez García13Isadora Lopes Alves14Adriaan A. Lammertsma15on behalf of the AMYPAD ConsortiumAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceIXICO PlcIXICO PlcIXICO PlcNIMTLab, Faculty of Medicine, Geneva UniversityEdinburgh Imaging, Queen’s Medical Research Institute, University of EdinburghEdinburgh Imaging, Queen’s Medical Research Institute, University of EdinburghAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceBarcelonaβeta Brain Research Centre, Pasqual Maragall FoundationAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam NeuroscienceAbstract Background Despite its widespread use, the semi-quantitative standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) may be biased compared with the distribution volume ratio (DVR). This bias may be partially explained by changes in cerebral blood flow (CBF) and is likely to be also dependent on the extent of the underlying amyloid-β (Aβ) burden. This study aimed to compare SUVR with DVR and to evaluate the effects of underlying Aβ burden and CBF on bias in SUVR in mainly cognitively unimpaired participants. Participants were scanned according to a dual-time window protocol, with either [18F]flutemetamol (N = 90) or [18F]florbetaben (N = 31). The validated basisfunction-based implementation of the two-step simplified reference tissue model was used to derive DVR and R 1 parametric images, and SUVR was calculated from 90 to 110 min post-injection, all with the cerebellar grey matter as reference tissue. First, linear regression and Bland–Altman analyses were used to compare (regional) SUVR with DVR. Then, generalized linear models were applied to evaluate whether (bias in) SUVR relative to DVR could be explained by R 1 for the global cortical average (GCA), precuneus, posterior cingulate, and orbitofrontal region. Results Despite high correlations (GCA: R 2 ≥ 0.85), large overestimation and proportional bias of SUVR relative to DVR was observed. Negative associations were observed between both SUVR or SUVRbias and R 1, albeit non-significant. Conclusion The present findings demonstrate that bias in SUVR relative to DVR is strongly related to underlying Aβ burden. Furthermore, in a cohort consisting mainly of cognitively unimpaired individuals, the effect of relative CBF on bias in SUVR appears limited. EudraCT Number: 2018-002277-22, registered on: 25-06-2018.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-022-00898-8Alzheimer’s diseaseAmyloid PETCerebral blood flowQuantificationSUVR bias |
| spellingShingle | Fiona Heeman Maqsood Yaqub Janine Hendriks Bart N. M. van Berckel Lyduine E. Collij Katherine R. Gray Richard Manber Robin Wolz Valentina Garibotto Catriona Wimberley Craig Ritchie Frederik Barkhof Juan Domingo Gispert David Vállez García Isadora Lopes Alves Adriaan A. Lammertsma on behalf of the AMYPAD Consortium Impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on SUVR bias EJNMMI Research Alzheimer’s disease Amyloid PET Cerebral blood flow Quantification SUVR bias |
| title | Impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on SUVR bias |
| title_full | Impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on SUVR bias |
| title_fullStr | Impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on SUVR bias |
| title_full_unstemmed | Impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on SUVR bias |
| title_short | Impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on SUVR bias |
| title_sort | impact of cerebral blood flow and amyloid load on suvr bias |
| topic | Alzheimer’s disease Amyloid PET Cerebral blood flow Quantification SUVR bias |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-022-00898-8 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fionaheeman impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT maqsoodyaqub impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT janinehendriks impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT bartnmvanberckel impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT lyduineecollij impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT katherinergray impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT richardmanber impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT robinwolz impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT valentinagaribotto impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT catrionawimberley impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT craigritchie impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT frederikbarkhof impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT juandomingogispert impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT davidvallezgarcia impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT isadoralopesalves impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT adriaanalammertsma impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias AT onbehalfoftheamypadconsortium impactofcerebralbloodflowandamyloidloadonsuvrbias |