MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809809319 · doi:10.1002/syn.22041

Test–retest variability of [<sup>11</sup>C]ABP688 estimates of metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 availability in humans

2018· article· en· W2809809319 on OpenAlexafffund
Kelly Smart, Sylvia M. L. Cox, Atsuko Nagano‐Saito, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Marco Leyton, Chawki Benkelfat

Bibliographic record

VenueSynapse · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBinding potentialRadioligandMetabotropic glutamate receptor 5Internal medicineAmygdalaPsychologyEndocrinologyMedicineNuclear medicinePositron emission tomographyMetabotropic glutamate receptorGlutamate receptorReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract [11C]ABP688 is a positron emission tomography (PET) radioligand that binds selectively to metabotropic glutamate type 5 receptors (mGluR5). The use of this tracer has identified receptor binding changes in clinical populations, and has been informative in drug occupancy studies. However, previous studies have found significant increases in [11C]ABP688 binding in the later scan of same‐day comparisons, and estimates of test‐retest reliability under consistent scanning conditions are not available. The objective of this study was to assess the variability of [11C]ABP688 binding in healthy people in scans performed at the same time of day. Two [11C]ABP688 scans were acquired in eight healthy volunteers (6 women, 2 men) using a high‐resolution research tomograph (HRRT). Scans were acquired 3 weeks apart with start times between 10:00am and 1:30pm. Mean mGluR5 binding potential (BPND) values were calculated across cortical, striatal and limbic brain regions. Participants reported on subjective mood state after each scan and blood samples were drawn for cortisol analysis. No significant change in BPNDbetween scans was observed. Variability in BPNDvalues of 11–21% was observed across regions, with the greatest change in the hippocampus and amygdala. Reliability was low to moderate. BPNDwas not statistically related to scan start time, subjective anxiety, serum cortisol levels, or menstrual phase in women. Overall, [11C]ABP688 BPNDestimates show moderate variability in healthy people. Reliability is fair in cortical and striatal regions, and lower in limbic regions. Future research using this ligand should account for this in study design and analysis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSynapseSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207