4.5 Article

Comparison study of amyloid PET and voxel-based morphometry analysis in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 285, Issue 1-2, Pages 100-108

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2009.06.005

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; Amyloid; Early diagnosis; Magnetic resonance imaging; Positron emission tomography; BF-227

Funding

  1. National Institute of Biomedical Innovation
  2. New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) of Japan
  3. Ministry of Health, an Asan Trazeneca Research
  4. Novartis Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Two techniques employed for the early diagnosis of dementia are the imaging of amyloid-beta protein using positron emission tomography (PET) and voxel-based morphometry analysis of MRI (VBM-MRI). The purpose of this study was-to evaluate the clinical utility of amyloid PET and VBM-MRI for the early diagnosis and tracking of the severity of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The neuritic plaque burden and gray matter losses were evaluated using [C-11]BF-227-PET and VBM-MRI in 12 healthy controls, 13 subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), including 6 who converted to AD and 7 who did not convert, and 15 AD patients. The AD patients and the MCI converters exhibited a neocortical retention of BF-227 and parahippocampal gray matter loss shown by VBM-MRI. The MCI converters were more clearly distinguished from the MCI non-converters in BF-227-PET than VBM-MRI. The combined sample of the MCI converters and AD patients showed a significant correlation of MMSE scores with the global gray matter loss, but not with the BF-227 retention. These findings suggest that amyloid PET using [C-11]BF-227 is better suited for the prediction of conversion from MCI to AD, while VBM-MRI appears to be better suited for tracking the severity of dementia. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available