Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33017429›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Comparative test-retest variability of outcome parameters derived from brain [18F]FDG PET studies in non-human primates.

Sébastien Goutal, Nicolas Tournier, Martine Guillermier, Nadja Van Camp, Olivier Barret, Mylène Gaudin, Michel Bottlaender, Philippe Hantraye, Sonia Lavisse

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. The anterior nucleus of the thalamus plays a role in the epileptic network.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sébastien GoutalLaboratoire des Maladies Neurodégénératives, CEA, CNRS, MIRCen, Université Paris-Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
Nicolas TournierLaboratoire d'Imagerie Biomédicale Multimodale (BioMaps), CEA, CNRS, Inserm, Service Hospitalier Frédéric Joliot, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France.
Martine GuillermierLaboratoire des Maladies Neurodégénératives, CEA, CNRS, MIRCen, Université Paris-Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
Nadja Van CampLaboratoire des Maladies Neurodégénératives, CEA, CNRS, MIRCen, Université Paris-Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
Olivier BarretLaboratoire des Maladies Neurodégénératives, CEA, CNRS, MIRCen, Université Paris-Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
Mylène GaudinLaboratoire des Maladies Neurodégénératives, CEA, CNRS, MIRCen, Université Paris-Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
Michel BottlaenderLaboratoire d'Imagerie Biomédicale Multimodale (BioMaps), CEA, CNRS, Inserm, Service Hospitalier Frédéric Joliot, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France.
Philippe HantrayeLaboratoire des Maladies Neurodégénératives, CEA, CNRS, MIRCen, Université Paris-Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.
Sonia LavisseLaboratoire des Maladies Neurodégénératives, CEA, CNRS, MIRCen, Université Paris-Saclay, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5240-4686
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionKnowledge of the repeatability of quantitative parameters derived from [18F]FDG PET images is essential to define the group size and allow correct interpretation. Here we tested repeatability and accuracy of different [18F]FDG absolute and relative quantification parameters in a standardized preclinical setup in nonhuman primates (NHP). MATERIAL AND

methodsRepeated brain [18F]FDG scans were performed in 6 healthy NHP under controlled experimental factors likely to account for variability. Regional cerebral metabolic rate of glucose (CMRglu) was calculated using a Patlak plot with blood input function Semi-quantitative approaches measuring standard uptake values (SUV, SUV×glycemia and SUVR (SUV Ratio) using the pons or cerebellum as a reference region) were considered. Test-retest variability of all quantification parameters were compared in different brain regions in terms of absolute variability and intra-and-inter-subject variabilities. In an independent [18F]FDG PET experiment, robustness of these parameters was evaluated in 4 naive NHP.

resultsExperimental conditions (injected dose, body weight, animal temperature) were the same at both imaging sessions (p >0.4). No significant difference in the [18F]FDG quantification parameters was found between test and retest sessions. Absolute variability of CMRglu, SUV, SUV×glycemia and normalized SUV ranged from 25 to 43%, 16 to 21%, 23 to 28%, and 7 to 14%, respectively. Intra-subject variability largely explained the absolute variability of all quantitative parameters. They were all significantly correlated to each other and they were all robust. Arterial and venous glycemia were highly correlated (r = 0.9691; p<0.0001).

conclusion[18F]FDG test-retest studies in NHP protocols need to be conducted under well-standardized experimental conditions to assess and select the most reliable and reproducible quantification approach. Furthermore, the choice of the quantification parameter has to account for the transversal or follow-up study design. If pons and cerebellum regions are not affected, non-invasive SUVR is the most favorable approach for both designs.

Indexed as

Positron-Emission TomographyAnimalsBrainFluorodeoxyglucose F18GlucoseMacaca fascicularisMaleRadiopharmaceuticalsReproducibility of ResultsFluorodeoxyglucose F18GlucoseRadiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID33017429
PMCPMC7535063
OpenAlexW3089552068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.