Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies

Yi Su, Shaney Flores, Guoqiao Wang, Russ C. Hornbeck, Benjamin Speidel, Nelly Joseph-Mathurin, Andrei G. Vlassenko, Brian A. Gordon, Robert A. Koeppe, William E. Klunk, Clifford R. Jack, Martin R. Farlow, Stephen Salloway, Barbara J. Snider, Sarah B. Berman, Erik D. Roberson, Jared Brosch, Ivonne Jimenez-Velazques, Christopher H. van Dyck, Douglas Galasko & 25 others Shauna H. Yuan, Suman Jayadev, Lawrence S. Honig, Serge Gauthier, Ging Yuek R. Hsiung, Mario Masellis, William S. Brooks, Michael Fulham, Roger Clarnette, Colin L. Masters, David Wallon, Didier Hannequin, Bruno Dubois, Jeremie Pariente, Raquel Sanchez-Valle, Catherine Mummery, John M. Ringman, Michel Bottlaender, Gregory Klein, Smiljana Milosavljevic-Ristic, Eric McDade, Chengjie Xiong, John C. Morris, Randall J. Bateman, Tammie L.S. Benzinger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Quantitative in vivo measurement of brain amyloid burden is important for both research and clinical purposes. However, the existence of multiple imaging tracers presents challenges to the interpretation of such measurements. This study presents a direct comparison of Pittsburgh compound B–based and florbetapir-based amyloid imaging in the same participants from two independent cohorts using a crossover design. Methods: Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir amyloid PET imaging data from three different cohorts were analyzed using previously established pipelines to obtain global amyloid burden measurements. These measurements were converted to the Centiloid scale to allow fair comparison between the two tracers. The mean and inter-individual variability of the two tracers were compared using multivariate linear models both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Results: Global amyloid burden measured using the two tracers were strongly correlated in both cohorts. However, higher variability was observed when florbetapir was used as the imaging tracer. The variability may be partially caused by white matter signal as partial volume correction reduces the variability and improves the correlations between the two tracers. Amyloid burden measured using both tracers was found to be in association with clinical and psychometric measurements. Longitudinal comparison of the two tracers was also performed in similar but separate cohorts whose baseline amyloid load was considered elevated (i.e., amyloid positive). No significant difference was detected in the average annualized rate of change measurements made with these two tracers. Discussion: Although the amyloid burden measurements were quite similar using these two tracers as expected, difference was observable even after conversion into the Centiloid scale. Further investigation is warranted to identify optimal strategies to harmonize amyloid imaging data acquired using different tracers.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)180-190
Number of pages11
JournalAlzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring
Volume11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2019

Fingerprint

Amyloid
Longitudinal Studies
Cross-Sectional Studies
2-(4'-(methylamino)phenyl)-6-hydroxybenzothiazole
florbetapir
Psychometrics
Cross-Over Studies
Linear Models
Brain
Research

Cite this

Su, Yi ; Flores, Shaney ; Wang, Guoqiao ; Hornbeck, Russ C. ; Speidel, Benjamin ; Joseph-Mathurin, Nelly ; Vlassenko, Andrei G. ; Gordon, Brian A. ; Koeppe, Robert A. ; Klunk, William E. ; Jack, Clifford R. ; Farlow, Martin R. ; Salloway, Stephen ; Snider, Barbara J. ; Berman, Sarah B. ; Roberson, Erik D. ; Brosch, Jared ; Jimenez-Velazques, Ivonne ; van Dyck, Christopher H. ; Galasko, Douglas ; Yuan, Shauna H. ; Jayadev, Suman ; Honig, Lawrence S. ; Gauthier, Serge ; Hsiung, Ging Yuek R. ; Masellis, Mario ; Brooks, William S. ; Fulham, Michael ; Clarnette, Roger ; Masters, Colin L. ; Wallon, David ; Hannequin, Didier ; Dubois, Bruno ; Pariente, Jeremie ; Sanchez-Valle, Raquel ; Mummery, Catherine ; Ringman, John M. ; Bottlaender, Michel ; Klein, Gregory ; Milosavljevic-Ristic, Smiljana ; McDade, Eric ; Xiong, Chengjie ; Morris, John C. ; Bateman, Randall J. ; Benzinger, Tammie L.S. / Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. In: Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring. 2019 ; Vol. 11. pp. 180-190.
@article{5d8462824a65428bad98f38fcfa6e249,
title = "Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies",
abstract = "Introduction: Quantitative in vivo measurement of brain amyloid burden is important for both research and clinical purposes. However, the existence of multiple imaging tracers presents challenges to the interpretation of such measurements. This study presents a direct comparison of Pittsburgh compound B–based and florbetapir-based amyloid imaging in the same participants from two independent cohorts using a crossover design. Methods: Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir amyloid PET imaging data from three different cohorts were analyzed using previously established pipelines to obtain global amyloid burden measurements. These measurements were converted to the Centiloid scale to allow fair comparison between the two tracers. The mean and inter-individual variability of the two tracers were compared using multivariate linear models both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Results: Global amyloid burden measured using the two tracers were strongly correlated in both cohorts. However, higher variability was observed when florbetapir was used as the imaging tracer. The variability may be partially caused by white matter signal as partial volume correction reduces the variability and improves the correlations between the two tracers. Amyloid burden measured using both tracers was found to be in association with clinical and psychometric measurements. Longitudinal comparison of the two tracers was also performed in similar but separate cohorts whose baseline amyloid load was considered elevated (i.e., amyloid positive). No significant difference was detected in the average annualized rate of change measurements made with these two tracers. Discussion: Although the amyloid burden measurements were quite similar using these two tracers as expected, difference was observable even after conversion into the Centiloid scale. Further investigation is warranted to identify optimal strategies to harmonize amyloid imaging data acquired using different tracers.",
keywords = "Amyloid imaging, Centiloid, Florbetapir, PiB, Positron emission tomography",
author = "Yi Su and Shaney Flores and Guoqiao Wang and Hornbeck, {Russ C.} and Benjamin Speidel and Nelly Joseph-Mathurin and Vlassenko, {Andrei G.} and Gordon, {Brian A.} and Koeppe, {Robert A.} and Klunk, {William E.} and Jack, {Clifford R.} and Farlow, {Martin R.} and Stephen Salloway and Snider, {Barbara J.} and Berman, {Sarah B.} and Roberson, {Erik D.} and Jared Brosch and Ivonne Jimenez-Velazques and {van Dyck}, {Christopher H.} and Douglas Galasko and Yuan, {Shauna H.} and Suman Jayadev and Honig, {Lawrence S.} and Serge Gauthier and Hsiung, {Ging Yuek R.} and Mario Masellis and Brooks, {William S.} and Michael Fulham and Roger Clarnette and Masters, {Colin L.} and David Wallon and Didier Hannequin and Bruno Dubois and Jeremie Pariente and Raquel Sanchez-Valle and Catherine Mummery and Ringman, {John M.} and Michel Bottlaender and Gregory Klein and Smiljana Milosavljevic-Ristic and Eric McDade and Chengjie Xiong and Morris, {John C.} and Bateman, {Randall J.} and Benzinger, {Tammie L.S.}",
year = "2019",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.dadm.2018.12.008",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "180--190",
journal = "Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring",
issn = "2352-8729",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Su, Y, Flores, S, Wang, G, Hornbeck, RC, Speidel, B, Joseph-Mathurin, N, Vlassenko, AG, Gordon, BA, Koeppe, RA, Klunk, WE, Jack, CR, Farlow, MR, Salloway, S, Snider, BJ, Berman, SB, Roberson, ED, Brosch, J, Jimenez-Velazques, I, van Dyck, CH, Galasko, D, Yuan, SH, Jayadev, S, Honig, LS, Gauthier, S, Hsiung, GYR, Masellis, M, Brooks, WS, Fulham, M, Clarnette, R, Masters, CL, Wallon, D, Hannequin, D, Dubois, B, Pariente, J, Sanchez-Valle, R, Mummery, C, Ringman, JM, Bottlaender, M, Klein, G, Milosavljevic-Ristic, S, McDade, E, Xiong, C, Morris, JC, Bateman, RJ & Benzinger, TLS 2019, 'Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies' Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring, vol. 11, pp. 180-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dadm.2018.12.008

Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. / Su, Yi; Flores, Shaney; Wang, Guoqiao; Hornbeck, Russ C.; Speidel, Benjamin; Joseph-Mathurin, Nelly; Vlassenko, Andrei G.; Gordon, Brian A.; Koeppe, Robert A.; Klunk, William E.; Jack, Clifford R.; Farlow, Martin R.; Salloway, Stephen; Snider, Barbara J.; Berman, Sarah B.; Roberson, Erik D.; Brosch, Jared; Jimenez-Velazques, Ivonne; van Dyck, Christopher H.; Galasko, Douglas; Yuan, Shauna H.; Jayadev, Suman; Honig, Lawrence S.; Gauthier, Serge; Hsiung, Ging Yuek R.; Masellis, Mario; Brooks, William S.; Fulham, Michael; Clarnette, Roger; Masters, Colin L.; Wallon, David; Hannequin, Didier; Dubois, Bruno; Pariente, Jeremie; Sanchez-Valle, Raquel; Mummery, Catherine; Ringman, John M.; Bottlaender, Michel; Klein, Gregory; Milosavljevic-Ristic, Smiljana; McDade, Eric; Xiong, Chengjie; Morris, John C.; Bateman, Randall J.; Benzinger, Tammie L.S.

In: Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring, Vol. 11, 01.12.2019, p. 180-190.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies

AU - Su, Yi

AU - Flores, Shaney

AU - Wang, Guoqiao

AU - Hornbeck, Russ C.

AU - Speidel, Benjamin

AU - Joseph-Mathurin, Nelly

AU - Vlassenko, Andrei G.

AU - Gordon, Brian A.

AU - Koeppe, Robert A.

AU - Klunk, William E.

AU - Jack, Clifford R.

AU - Farlow, Martin R.

AU - Salloway, Stephen

AU - Snider, Barbara J.

AU - Berman, Sarah B.

AU - Roberson, Erik D.

AU - Brosch, Jared

AU - Jimenez-Velazques, Ivonne

AU - van Dyck, Christopher H.

AU - Galasko, Douglas

AU - Yuan, Shauna H.

AU - Jayadev, Suman

AU - Honig, Lawrence S.

AU - Gauthier, Serge

AU - Hsiung, Ging Yuek R.

AU - Masellis, Mario

AU - Brooks, William S.

AU - Fulham, Michael

AU - Clarnette, Roger

AU - Masters, Colin L.

AU - Wallon, David

AU - Hannequin, Didier

AU - Dubois, Bruno

AU - Pariente, Jeremie

AU - Sanchez-Valle, Raquel

AU - Mummery, Catherine

AU - Ringman, John M.

AU - Bottlaender, Michel

AU - Klein, Gregory

AU - Milosavljevic-Ristic, Smiljana

AU - McDade, Eric

AU - Xiong, Chengjie

AU - Morris, John C.

AU - Bateman, Randall J.

AU - Benzinger, Tammie L.S.

PY - 2019/12/1

Y1 - 2019/12/1

N2 - Introduction: Quantitative in vivo measurement of brain amyloid burden is important for both research and clinical purposes. However, the existence of multiple imaging tracers presents challenges to the interpretation of such measurements. This study presents a direct comparison of Pittsburgh compound B–based and florbetapir-based amyloid imaging in the same participants from two independent cohorts using a crossover design. Methods: Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir amyloid PET imaging data from three different cohorts were analyzed using previously established pipelines to obtain global amyloid burden measurements. These measurements were converted to the Centiloid scale to allow fair comparison between the two tracers. The mean and inter-individual variability of the two tracers were compared using multivariate linear models both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Results: Global amyloid burden measured using the two tracers were strongly correlated in both cohorts. However, higher variability was observed when florbetapir was used as the imaging tracer. The variability may be partially caused by white matter signal as partial volume correction reduces the variability and improves the correlations between the two tracers. Amyloid burden measured using both tracers was found to be in association with clinical and psychometric measurements. Longitudinal comparison of the two tracers was also performed in similar but separate cohorts whose baseline amyloid load was considered elevated (i.e., amyloid positive). No significant difference was detected in the average annualized rate of change measurements made with these two tracers. Discussion: Although the amyloid burden measurements were quite similar using these two tracers as expected, difference was observable even after conversion into the Centiloid scale. Further investigation is warranted to identify optimal strategies to harmonize amyloid imaging data acquired using different tracers.

AB - Introduction: Quantitative in vivo measurement of brain amyloid burden is important for both research and clinical purposes. However, the existence of multiple imaging tracers presents challenges to the interpretation of such measurements. This study presents a direct comparison of Pittsburgh compound B–based and florbetapir-based amyloid imaging in the same participants from two independent cohorts using a crossover design. Methods: Pittsburgh compound B and florbetapir amyloid PET imaging data from three different cohorts were analyzed using previously established pipelines to obtain global amyloid burden measurements. These measurements were converted to the Centiloid scale to allow fair comparison between the two tracers. The mean and inter-individual variability of the two tracers were compared using multivariate linear models both cross-sectionally and longitudinally. Results: Global amyloid burden measured using the two tracers were strongly correlated in both cohorts. However, higher variability was observed when florbetapir was used as the imaging tracer. The variability may be partially caused by white matter signal as partial volume correction reduces the variability and improves the correlations between the two tracers. Amyloid burden measured using both tracers was found to be in association with clinical and psychometric measurements. Longitudinal comparison of the two tracers was also performed in similar but separate cohorts whose baseline amyloid load was considered elevated (i.e., amyloid positive). No significant difference was detected in the average annualized rate of change measurements made with these two tracers. Discussion: Although the amyloid burden measurements were quite similar using these two tracers as expected, difference was observable even after conversion into the Centiloid scale. Further investigation is warranted to identify optimal strategies to harmonize amyloid imaging data acquired using different tracers.

KW - Amyloid imaging

KW - Centiloid

KW - Florbetapir

KW - PiB

KW - Positron emission tomography

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061783606&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.dadm.2018.12.008

DO - 10.1016/j.dadm.2018.12.008

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 180

EP - 190

JO - Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring

JF - Alzheimer's and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring

SN - 2352-8729

ER -