4.6 Article

Evaluation of the PBR/TSPO radioligand [F-18]DPA-714 in a rat model of focal cerebral ischemia

期刊

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2009.205

关键词

cerebral ischemia; inflammatory reaction; peripheral-type benzodiazepine receptor; PET imaging; transient middle cerebral artery occlusion; TSPO

资金

  1. EC [LSHC-CT-2004-503569, LSHB-CT-2005-5121146]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Focal cerebral ischemia leads to an inflammatory reaction involving an overexpression of the peripheral benzodiazepine receptor (PBR)/18-kDa translocator protein (TSPO) in the cerebral monocytic lineage (microglia and monocyte) and in astrocytes. Imaging of PBR/TSPO by positron emission tomography (PET) using radiolabeled ligands can document inflammatory processes induced by cerebral ischemia. We performed in vivo PET imaging with [F-18]DPA-714 to determine the time course of PBR/TSPO expression over several days after induction of cerebral ischemia in rats. In vivo PET imaging showed significant increase in DPA (N,N-diethyl-2-(2-(4-(2-fluoroethoxy)phenyl)-5,7-dimethylpyrazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidin-3-yl)acetamide) uptake on the injured side compared with that in the contralateral area on days 7, 11, 15, and 21 after ischemia; the maximal binding value was reached 11 days after ischemia. In vitro autoradiography confirmed these in vivo results. In vivo and in vitro [F-18]DPA-714 binding was displaced from the lesion by PK11195 and DPA-714. Immunohistochemistry showed increased PBR/TSPO expression, peaking at day 11 in cells expressing microglia/macrophage antigens in the ischemic area. At later times, a centripetal migration of astrocytes toward the lesion was observed, promoting the formation of an astrocytic scar. These results show that [F-18]DPA-714 provides accurate quantitative information of the time course of PBR/TSPO expression in experimental stroke. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2010) 30, 230-241; doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2009.205; published online 30 September 2009

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据