4.6 Article

In vivo variation in same-day estimates of metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 binding using [11C]ABP688 and [18F]FPEB

Journal

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
Volume 37, Issue 8, Pages 2716-2727

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0271678X16673646

Keywords

Positron emission tomography; metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5; [C-11]ABP688; [F-18]FPEB; test-retest

Funding

  1. VA National Center for PTSD [K01MH091354, K05DA022413, R01MH054137]
  2. [K01MH092681]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Positron emission tomography tracers [C-11]ABP688 and [F-18]FPEB target the metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 providing quantification of the brain glutamatergic system in vivo. Previous [C-11]ABP688 positron emission tomography human test-retest studies indicate that, when performed on the same day, significant binding increases are observed; however, little deviation is reported when scans are >7 days apart. Due to the small cohorts examined previously (eight and five males, respectively), we aimed to replicate the same-day test-retest studies in a larger cohort including both males and females. Results confirmed large within-subject binding differences (ranging from -23% to 108%), suggesting that measurements are greatly affected by study design. We further investigated whether this phenomenon was specific to [C-11]ABP688. Using [F-18] FPEB and methodology that accounts for residual radioactivity from the test scan, four subjects were scanned twice on the same day. In these subjects, binding estimates increased between 5% and 39% between scans. Consistent with [C-11]ABP688, mean absolute test-retest variability was previously reported as <12% when scans were >21 days apart. This replication study and pilot extension to [F-18]FPEB suggest that observed within-day binding variation may be due to characteristics of mGluR5; for example, diurnal variation in mGluR5 may affect measurement of this receptor.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available