Comparison of standardized uptake value ratio calculations in amyloid positron emission tomography brain imaging
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with florbetapir 18F (18F-AV-45) allows in vivo assessment of cerebral amyloid load and can be used in the evaluation of progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias associated with b-amyloid. However, cortical amyloid deposition can occur in healthy cases, as well as in patients with AD and quantification of cortical amyloid burden can improve the 18F-AV-45 PET imaging evaluations. The quantification is mostly performed by cortical-to-cerebellum standardized uptake value ratio (SUVr). The aim of our study was to compare two methods for SUVr calculations in amyloid florbetapir 18F PET brain imaging. In amyloid florbetapir 18F PET brain imaging study, we imaged 42 cases with the mean age of 72.6 ± 9.9 (mean ± standard deviation). They were imaged on different PET/computed tomography systems with 369.0 ± 34.2 kBq of 18F florbetapir. Data were reconstructed using the vendor's reconstruction software. Corresponding magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data were retrieved, and matched PET and MRI data were transferred to a common platform. Two methods were used for the calculation of the ratio of cortical-to-cerebellar signal (SUVr). One method was based on the MIM Software Inc., Version 6.4 software and only uses PET data. The second approach used the PMOD Neuro tool (version 3.5). This approach utilizes PET and corresponding MRI data (preferably T1-weighted) for better brain segmentation. For all the 42 cases, the average SUVr values for MIM and PMOD applications were 1.24 ± 0.26 and 1.22 ± 0.25, respectively, with a mean difference of 0.02 ± 0.15. The repeatability coefficient was 0.15 (12.3% of the mean). The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was very high, r = 0.96. For amyloid-negative cases, the average SUVr values were lower than all group SUVr average values, 0.96 ± 0.07 and 1.00 ± 0.09, for MIM and PMOD applications, respectively. A mean difference was 0.04 ± 0.12, the repeatability coefficient was 0.12 (12.9% of the mean) and the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was modest, r = 0.55. For amyloid-positive patients, the average SUVr values were higher than the same all grouP values, 1.34 ± 0.16 and 1.35 ± 0.20, respectively, with a mean difference of 0.01 ± 0.16. The repeatability coefficient was 0.16 (11.9% of the mean). The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was high, r = 0.93. Our results indicated that the SUVr values derived using MIM and PMOD Neuro are effectively interchangeable and well correlated. However, PET template-based quantification (MIM approach) is clinically friendlier and easier to use. MRI template-based quantification (PMOD Neuro) better delineates different regions of the brain, can be used with any tracer, and therefore is more suitable for research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».