4.7 Article

Japanese multicenter database of healthy controls for [I-123]FP-CIT SPECT

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-018-3976-5

Keywords

Multicenter trial; SPECT; [I-123]FP-CIT; Normal database; Dopamine transporter

Funding

  1. Nihon Medi-Physics CO., Ltd.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose The aim of this multicenter trial was to generate a [I-123]FP-CIT SPECT database of healthy controls from the common SPECT systems available in Japan. Methods This study included 510 sets of SPECT data from 256 healthy controls (116 men and 140 women; age range, 30-83 years) acquired from eight different centers. Images were reconstructed without attenuation or scatter correction (NOACNOSC), with only attenuation correction using the Chang method (ChangACNOSC) or X-ray CT (CTACNOSC), and with both scatter and attenuation correction using the Chang method (ChangACSC) or X-ray CT (CTACSC). These SPECT images were analyzed using the Southampton method. The outcome measure was the specific binding ratio (SBR) in the striatum. These striatal SBRs were calibrated from prior experiments using a striatal phantom. Results The original SBRs gradually decreased in the order of ChangACSC, CTACSC, ChangACNOSC, CTACNOSC, and NOACNOSC. The SBRs for NOACNOSC were 46% lower than those for ChangACSC. In contrast, the calibrated SBRs were almost equal under no scatter correction (NOSC) conditions. A significant effect of age was found, with an SBR decline rate of 6.3% per decade. In the 30-39 age group, SBRs were 12.2% higher in women than in men, but this increase declined with age and was absent in the 70-79 age group. Conclusions This study provided a large-scale quantitative database of [I-123]FP-CIT SPECT scans from different scanners in healthy controls across a wide age range and with balanced sex representation. The phantom calibration effectively harmonizes SPECT data from different SPECT systems under NOSC conditions. The data collected in this study may serve as a reference database.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available