MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W21257397 · doi:10.1136/vr.c4606

Kinetic modeling of CB1 PET tracer [11C]OMAR in rhesus monkeys and humans

2010· article· en· W21257397 on OpenAlexaff
Marc D. Normandin, David Weinzimmer, Jim Ropchan, David Labaree, Kuo‐Shyan Lin, N. Scott Mason, Richard E. Carson, Deepak Cyril D’Souza, Alexander Neumeister, Yiyun Huang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear medicineBolus (digestion)ED50ChemistryBinding potentialVolume of distributionPositron emission tomographyMedicinePharmacokineticsAnatomyReceptorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

216 Objectives [11C]OMAR was recently developed for PET imaging of cannabinoid type 1 (CB1) receptors. Here we investigate quantification methods for [11C]OMAR in monkeys and humans. Methods Three rhesus monkeys underwent a total of 18 scans on the Focus220. Data were acquired for 120 min after 4.2±0.6 mCi [11C]OMAR. In 5 scans, unlabeled OMAR was co-injected at doses up to 1.7 mg/kg. Ten human subjects underwent a total of 18 scans. Data were collected for 120 min on the HRRT after bolus of 18±1 mCi. In all studies, arterial input functions were obtained. Regional time activity curves (TACs) were extracted from the dynamic PET data. Distribution volume (VT) was estimated by 1- and 2-tissue models with (1Tv, 2Tv) or without (1T, 2T) vascular component. Logan graphical (LGA) and multilinear analysis (MA1) were applied with a range of t* values. Binding constants ED50 and EC50 (with regard to mass dose or late plasma level, respectively) were estimated by fitting a one-site model to VT values in monkeys. Results TACs from monkeys and humans were fitted poorly by 1T and 1Tv. 2T fits were good in both species. In monkeys, 2Tv usually estimated negligible blood volume (Vb) and VT nearly identical to 2T. In humans, 2Tv improved fits slightly in some regions with Vb=3±2% and VT 1±4% lower than 2T. In both species, MA1 with t*>20 min yielded VT values highly correlated with 2T (in humans: y=0.98x+0.05, R2=0.98). LGA was reliable in humans (y=0.96x+0.06, R2=0.95) but gave many low outliers in monkeys. VT was lower in humans than monkeys (~2 vs ~10 in high binding regions), as were K1 values (~0.05 vs ~0.2 1/min). In monkeys, ED50 was ~200μg/kg and EC50 ~40 nM with small variations between methods. Conclusions 2T was the best compartmental model for analysis of [11C]OMAR data in monkeys as well as in humans, where a vascular component sometimes improved fits. Graphical methods gave VT estimates similar to 2T in humans, but MA1 performed much better than LGA in monkeys

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207