Academic Radiology
Volume 15, Issue 11 , Pages 1376-1389, November 2008

Automated 11C-PiB Standardized Uptake Value Ratio1

  • Parnesh Raniga, BE

      Affiliations

    • CSIRO Preventative Health National Research Flagshift ICTC, The Australian e-Health Research Centre-BioMedIA, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, Australia
    • School of Electrical and Information Engineering, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to: P.R.
  • ,
  • Pierrick Bourgeat, PhD

      Affiliations

    • CSIRO Preventative Health National Research Flagshift ICTC, The Australian e-Health Research Centre-BioMedIA, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, Australia
  • ,
  • Jurgen Fripp, BE

      Affiliations

    • CSIRO Preventative Health National Research Flagshift ICTC, The Australian e-Health Research Centre-BioMedIA, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, Australia
  • ,
  • Oscar Acosta, PhD

      Affiliations

    • CSIRO Preventative Health National Research Flagshift ICTC, The Australian e-Health Research Centre-BioMedIA, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, Australia
  • ,
  • Victor L. Villemagne, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Nuclear Medicine and Centre for PET, and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
    • The Mental Health Research Institute, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  • ,
  • Christopher Rowe, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Nuclear Medicine and Centre for PET, and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
  • ,
  • Colin L. Masters, MD

      Affiliations

    • The Mental Health Research Institute, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
    • Centre for Neurosciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
  • ,
  • Gareth Jones, BSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Nuclear Medicine and Centre for PET, and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
  • ,
  • Graeme O'Keefe, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Nuclear Medicine and Centre for PET, and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
  • ,
  • Olivier Salvado, PhD

      Affiliations

    • CSIRO Preventative Health National Research Flagshift ICTC, The Australian e-Health Research Centre-BioMedIA, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, Australia
  • ,
  • Sébastien Ourselin, PhD

      Affiliations

    • CSIRO Preventative Health National Research Flagshift ICTC, The Australian e-Health Research Centre-BioMedIA, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, Australia
    • Centre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London, United Kingdom

Received 29 February 2008; accepted 9 July 2008.

Rationale and Objectives

Radiotracers such as 11C-PiB have enabled the in vivo imaging of amyloid-β plaques in the brain, one of the histopathologic hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) has become the most common normalization for 11C-PiB as it does not require dynamic scans or blood sampling. Normalization is performed by computing the ratio of 11C-PiB retention in the whole brain to that in cerebellar gray matter. However, SUVR is still conducted manually and is time consuming. An automated normalization algorithm is proposed.

Materials and Methods

Sixty participants from the Australian Imaging Biomarkers and Lifestyle (AIBL) study were used to test the developed algorithm and compare it against manual SUVR. The cohort consisted of participants likely to have AD (n = 20), those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 20), and normal controls (NC; n = 20). The participants underwent 11C-PiB PET scans. A subset (n = 15) also underwent magnetic resonance imaging scans. 11C-PET scans were segmented using an expectation maximization approach with inhomogeneity correction using three-dimensional cubic B-Splines. A cerebellar region was propagated and constrained by segmentation. Comparisons were made between manual and automated SUVR using regional analysis. Receiver-operating characteristic curves were computed for the task of AD–NC classification. Positron emission tomographic segmentations were also compared to co-registered magnetic resonance images of the same patient.

Results

Significant differences in regional means were observed between manual and automated SUVR. However, these changes were highly correlated (r > 0.8 for most regions). Significant differences (P < .05) in regional variances were also observed for the AD and NC subgroups. Area under the curve was 0.84 and 0.89 for manual and automated SUVR, respectively.

Conclusions

The automated normalization technique results in less within-group variance and better discrimination between AD and NC participants.

Key Words: Alzheimer's disease, 11C-PiB, SUVR, PET, segmentation, expectation, maximization

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

1 This research was funded by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Preventative Health Flagship (http://www.csiro.au/csiro/channel/pchcp.html).

PII: S1076-6332(08)00398-X

doi:10.1016/j.acra.2008.07.006

Academic Radiology
Volume 15, Issue 11 , Pages 1376-1389, November 2008