Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Radiological Physics and Technology
Published in: Radiological Physics and Technology 3/2018

01-09-2018

Impact of quantitative index derived from 123I-FP-CIT-SPECT on reconstruction with correction methods evaluated using a 3D-striatum digital brain phantom

Authors: Akihiro Furuta, Hideo Onishi, Noriyasu Yamaki, Nobuhiro Yada, Hizuru Amijima

Published in: Radiological Physics and Technology | Issue 3/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

We evaluated quantitation accuracy of the specific binding ratio (SBR) and specific uptake ratio (SUR) of dopamine transporter for various correction methods by using a novel three-dimensional striatum digital brain (3D-SDB) phantom comprised of segments containing the striatum, ventricle, brain parenchyma, and skull bone extracted from T2-weighted MR images. A process image was reconstructed by projection data sets with blurring, scatter, and attenuation from 3D-SDB phantom data. A 3D-iterative reconstruction algorithm was used without correction (OSEM), or with scatter (SC), attenuation (AC), AC + SC (ACSC), AC + resolution recovery (RR; ACRR), SC + RR (SCRR), AC + SC + RR (ACSCRR), AC + SC + RR + partial volume (PVC; ACSCRRP), and AC + SC + RR + PVC + ventricle (ACSCRRPV). Data were then quantified using SBR and SUR. Differences between measured and true SBR values were (in order): ACSCRR < ACSC < ACRR < AC < SCRR < SC < OSEM: the maximal error was 45.3%. The trend of differences between measured and true SUR values was similar to that of SBR; maximal error was 65%. The ACSCRR-corrected SUR, which was closer to the true value, was underestimated by 30.4%. However, the ACSCRRP-corrected SUR was underestimated by a maximum of 22.5%. The SUR in the ACSCRRPV was underestimated by 6.2%. The accuracy of quantitation was improved using various types of compensation and correction. Accuracy improved more for the SUR when PVC and ventricle correction were added.
Literature
1.
Günther I, Hall H, Halldin C, Swahn CG, Farde L, Sedvall G. [125I] beta-CIT-FE and [125I] beta-CIT-FP are superior to [125I] beta-CIT for dopamine transporter visualization: auto-radiographic evaluation in human brain. Nucl Med Biol. 1997;24:629–34.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Booij J, Tissingh G, Boer GJ, Speelman JD, Stoof JC, Janssen AG, Wolters EC, van Royen EA. [123I] FP-CIT SPECT shows a pronounced decline of striatal dopamine transporter labelling in early and advanced Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1997;62:133–40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Booij J, Habraken JBA, Bergmans P, Tissingh G, Winogrodzka A, Wolters EC, Janssen AG, Stoof JC, van Royen EA. Imaging of dopamine transporters with Iodine-123-FP-CIT SPECT in Healthy controls and patients with Parkinson’s Disease. J Nucl Med. 1998;39(11):1879–84.PubMed
4.
Asenbaum S, Pirker W, Angelberger P, Bencsits G, Pruckmayer M, Brücke T. [123I] beta- CIT and SPECT in essential tremor and Parkinson’s disease. J Neural Transm. 1998;105:1213–28.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Benamer HT, Patterson J, Grosset DG, Booij, De Bruin K, Van Royen E, Speelman JD, Horstink MH, Sips HJ, Dierckx RA, Versijpt J, Decoo D, Van Der Linden C, Hadley DM, Doder M, Lees AJ, Costa DC, Gacinovic S, Oertel WH, Pogarell O, Hoeffken H, Joseph K, Tatsch K, Schwarz J, Ries V. Accurate differentiation of parkinsonism and essential tremor using visual assessment of [123I]-FP-CIT SPECT imaging: the [123I]-FP-CIT study group. Mov Disord. 2000;15(3):503–10.CrossRefPubMed
6.
McKeith I, O’Brien J, Walker Z, Tatsch K, Booij J, Darcourt J, Padovani A, Giubbini R, Bonuccelli U, Volterrani D, Holmes C, Kemp P, Tabet N, Meyer I, Reininger C, DLB Study Group. Sensitivity and specificity of dopamine transporter imaging with 123I-FP-CIT SPECT in dementia with Lewy bodies: a phase III, multicentre study. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6(4):305–13.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Badiavas K, Molyvda E, Iakovou I, Tsolaki M, Psarraos K, Karatzas N. SPECT imaging evaluation in movement disorders: far beyond visual assessment. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:764–73.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Tossici-Bolt L, Hoffmann SM, Kemp PM, Mehta RL, Fleming JS. Quantification of [123I] FP-CIT SPECT brain images: an accurate technique for measurement of the specific binding ratio. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:1491–9.CrossRefPubMed
9.
GE Healthcare. DaTQUANT™ White Paper. NU-0217-05.12-EN-US DOC1156038.
10.
Takano K, Matsumura K, Watanabe Y, Yamada T, Kubo H, Naitou Y, Kuzuhara S, Takeda K. Phase 1 clinical study of 123-I-FP-CIT, a new radioligand for evaluating dopamine transporter by SPECT (II): Tracer kinetics in the brain. Kakuigaku. 1999;36(9):1013–22 (Japanese).
11.
Crespo C, Gallego J, Cot A, Falcon C, Bullich S, Pareto D. Aguiaru J, Sempau J, Lomeña F, Calviño F, Pavia J, Ros D. Quantification of dopaminergic neurotransmission SPECT studies with 123I-labelled radioligands. A comparison between different imaging systems and data acquisition protocols using Monte Carlo simulation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1334–42.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Buchert R, Kluge A, Tossici-Bolt L, Dickson J, Bronzel M, Lange C, Asenbaum S, Booij J, Atay Kapucu L, Svarer C, Koulibaly PM, Nobili F, Pagani M, Sabri O, Sera T, Tatsch K, Vander Borght T, Van Laere K, Varrone A, Iida H. Reduction in camera-specific variability in [123I] FP-CIT SPECT outcome measures by image reconstruction optimized for multisite setting: impact an age-dependence of the specific binding ratio in the ENC-DAT database of healthy controls. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1323–36.CrossRefPubMed
13.
14.
Tossici-Bolts L, Dickson JC, Sera T, Booij J, Asenbaun-Nan B, Bangnara MC, Borght TV, Jonsson C, de Nijs R, Hesse S, Koulibaly PM, Akdemir UO, Koole M, Tatsch K, Varrone A. [123I] FP-CIT ENC-DAT normal database: the impact of the reconstruction and quantification methods. EJNMMI Phys. 2017;4:8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s40658-017-0175-6.CrossRef
15.
Furuta A, Onishi H. Realistic 3D-striatum digital brain (3D-SDB) phantom studied for its effect on ventricle in the brain for semiquantitative index of specific binding ratio. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2017;73:1018–27 (Japanese).CrossRefPubMed
16.
Alpert NM. Berdichevsky D, Levin Z, Morris ED, Fischman AJ. Improved methods for image registration. Neuroimage. 1996;3:10–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Maeda H, Yamaki N, Azuma M. Development of the software package of the nuclear medicine data processor for education and research. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2012;68:299–306 (Japanese).CrossRefPubMed
18.
19.
Axelsson B. Masaki P, Iseraelsson A. Subtraction of Compton-scattered photons in single-photon emission computerized tomography. J Nucl Med. 1984;125:490–9.
20.
Yamaki N, Natsume T, Takeda K, Maeda H, Hasebe S, Kinda A, Motomura N. Simultaneous spatial resolution correction in SPECT reconstruction using OS-EM algorithm. Jpn J Med Phys. 2004;24:61–71 (Japanese).
21.
Shimizu S, Namioka N, Hirose D, Kanetaka H, Hirao K, Hatanaka H, Takenoshita N, Kaneko Y, Ogawa Y, Tsugawa A, Umahara T, Sakurai H, Hanyu H. Comparison of diagnostic utility of semi-quantitative analysis for DAT-SPECT for distinguishing DLB from AD. J Neurol Sci. 2017;377:50–4.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Nonokuma M, Kuwabara Y, Hida K, Tani T, Takano K, Yoshimitsu K. Optimal ROI setting on the anatomically normalized I-123 FP-CIT images using high-resolution SPECT. Ann Nucl Med. 2016;30:637–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Fleming JS, Bolt L, Stratford JS, Kemp PM. The specific uptake size index for quantifying radiopharmaceutical uptake. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49:227–34.CrossRef
24.
Koch W, Radau PE, Hamann C, Tatsch K. Clinical testing of an optimized software solution for an automated, observer-independent evaluation of dopamine transport SPECT studies. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1109–18.PubMed
25.
Calvini P, Rodriguez G, Inguglia F, Mggnone A, Guerra UP, Nobill F. The basal ganglia matching tools package for striatal uptake semi-quantification: description and validation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1240–53.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Impact of quantitative index derived from 123I-FP-CIT-SPECT on reconstruction with correction methods evaluated using a 3D-striatum digital brain phantom
Authors
Akihiro Furuta
Hideo Onishi
Noriyasu Yamaki
Nobuhiro Yada
Hizuru Amijima
Publication date
01-09-2018
Publisher
Springer Singapore
Published in
Radiological Physics and Technology / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 1865-0333
Electronic ISSN: 1865-0341
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-018-0468-z

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

Radiological Physics and Technology 3/2018 Go to the issue

Letter to the Editor

Comments on “Novel real-time tumor-contouring method using deep learning to prevent mistracking in X-ray fluoroscopy” by Terunuma et al.

OriginalPaper

Automated prediction of dosimetric eligibility of patients with prostate cancer undergoing intensity-modulated radiation therapy using a convolutional neural network

OriginalPaper

Undersampling patterns in k-space for compressed sensing MRI using two-dimensional Cartesian sampling

Author’s reply to Letter to the Editor

Response to “Comments on ‘Novel real-time tumor-contouring method using deep learning to prevent mistracking in X-ray fluoroscopy”’

OriginalPaper

Influence of arm position and respiration technique during liver examinations on the detectability of mammary lesions

OriginalPaper

Computer-aided diagnosis with radiogenomics: analysis of the relationship between genotype and morphological changes of the brain magnetic resonance images