Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Research ArticleNeurology

Management Impact of Imaging Brain Vesicular Monoamine Transporter Type 2 in Clinically Uncertain Parkinsonian Syndrome with 18F-AV133 and PET

Paschal K. Alexander, Yenni Lie, Gareth Jones, Chomalaven Sivaratnam, Svetlana Bozinvski, Rachel S. Mulligan, Kenneth Young, Victor L. Villemagne and Christopher C. Rowe
Journal of Nuclear Medicine November 2017, 58 (11) 1815-1820; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.189019
Paschal K. Alexander
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yenni Lie
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gareth Jones
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chomalaven Sivaratnam
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Svetlana Bozinvski
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rachel S. Mulligan
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kenneth Young
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Victor L. Villemagne
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
2Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; and
3Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher C. Rowe
1Department of Molecular Imaging and Therapy, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
2Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; and
3Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Idiopathic Parkinson disease is a common neurodegenerative disorder for which misdiagnosis occurs in up to 30% of patients after initial assessment and in 10%–15% even after long-term follow-up. Vesicular monoamine transporter type 2 (VMAT2) imaging with PET allows assessment of the integrity of the presynaptic dopaminergic pathway. We investigated the management impact of VMAT2 imaging in patients with clinically uncertain Parkinsonian syndromes. Methods: Forty-seven patients with clinically uncertain Parkinsonian syndromes (mean age ± SD, 56.9 ± 14.9 y; age range, 21–80 y) were referred from movement disorder specialists. All participants underwent a 20-min PET acquisition 2 h after injection of 250 MBq of 18F-AV-133, and the resulting images were quantitatively assessed. Clinical impact was recorded as high, moderate, or low based on diagnosis and management questionnaires completed by the referring specialists before and after release of the PET results. Management impact was high if there was a change in diagnostic category, moderate if there was a change in medication, and low if there was no change. Results: VMAT2 PET changed the diagnosis in 11 (23%) and medication in 25 (53%) participants. Management impact was high in 23%, moderate in 38%, and low in 39% of the participants. High diagnostic confidence increased from 11% of patients to 80% after the release of the scan results. Conclusion: 18F-AV-133 had substantial management impact in patients with clinically uncertain Parkinsonian syndromes. VMAT2 imaging with 18F-AV133 might improve diagnosis, prognosis, and appropriate use of medication, translating into better patient outcomes.

  • management impact
  • molecular imaging
  • Parkinson disease
  • PET
  • VMAT2

Idiopathic Parkinson disease (iPD) is a common neurodegenerative disorder with an incidence of about 17 per 100,000 per year (1,2). The pathophysiology of iPD includes loss of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra and thereby loss of dopaminergic terminals in the striatum. This terminal loss correlates with the extrapyramidal symptoms of the disease. Although bradykinesia, rigidity, and resting tremor remain the clinical diagnostic criteria for iPD, reports of diagnostic accuracy compared with postmortem diagnosis varied from 70% in early stage disease to 90% in advanced stage in a tertiary referral movement disorder clinic (3–5). However, about 1 in 5 patients presenting with Parkinsonian features do not meet these diagnostic criteria (6) or may have additional clinical features suggesting another disease process. Under these circumstances, the patient may be labeled as clinically uncertain Parkinson syndrome (CUPS) (7). Several conditions might overlap with iPD, leading to misdiagnosis or diagnostic uncertainty. Among these, disorders in which the dopaminergic pathways are intact include essential tremor, dystonia, drug-induced parkinsonism, and symptoms without dopaminergic deficit, or disorders in which there is dopaminergic neuronal loss plus more extensive neurodegeneration, such as multiple-system atrophy, progressive supranuclear palsy, and corticobasal degeneration.

The shortcomings of clinical examination alone and the advantages of early diagnosis and early treatment necessitate a method for more accurate and early diagnosis.

The integrity of the nigrostriatal system can be evaluated noninvasively using PET and SPECT to provide clinical information that can assist in the early and differential diagnosis of iPD (8–14). Several radioligands have been developed for this purpose to image either presynaptic targets such as the dopamine transporter (DAT), vesicular monoamine transporter type 2 (VMAT2), dihydroxyphenylalanine decarboxylase activity, or postsynaptic D2 dopamine receptors (6). VMAT2 is involved in the uptake and storage of dopamine and other monoamines into presynaptic vesicles. It is mainly located at the nerve endings as well as nerve cell bodies and dendrites (15). Reduction in VMAT2 in the striatum reflects loss of nigrostriatal terminals (16,17). The in vivo measurement of VMAT2 density has been shown to be potentially useful for the early and differential diagnosis of iPD (18,19).

18F-AV-133 is an 18F-labeled dihydrotetrabenazine analog. This compound binds selectively and with high affinity to VMAT2 (19,20) and can sensitively detect monoaminergic terminal reductions in patients with Parkinson disease (PD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (15). Although DAT imaging has been shown to improve diagnostic accuracy for iPD and have substantial management impact in CUPS, VMAT2 imaging with 18F-AV-133 has potential advantages such as better image quality and quantification, shorter time between tracer administration and scanning, shorter scan duration, and no requirement for prior blockade of the thyroid to prevent radioactive iodine uptake.

This study aimed to assess the impact of VMAT2 imaging using 18F-AV133, on management of clinically uncertain Parkinson syndrome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Design and Subject Selection

The study was approved by the Austin Health Human Research Ethics Committee. All participants provided written informed consent before their participation in the study. The study used a prospective experimental study design. Study participants comprised patients with atypical features of parkinsonism who were referred from movement disorder specialists practicing in private or public clinics across Melbourne, Australia.

Inclusion Criteria

Participants were required to be older than 18 y and English speaking. Participants were also required to have more than 7 y of education and to have adequate visual and auditory acuity to complete the clinical and cognitive assessment.

Exclusion Criteria

Patients were excluded if they had a history of cancer (other than skin or in situ prostate cancer) within the previous 5 y. Persons were also excluded if they were unable to give informed written consent.

Pregnancy was excluded in women of childbearing age by blood test just before the scan.

Assessments and Evaluation

Each participant underwent neuropsychologic assessment and neurologic examination. The neuropsychologic assessment involved the Mini-Mental State Examination, clinical dementia rating, hospital anxiety and depression scale, logical memory score, and verbal fluency scores. The neurologic evaluation comprised the Hoehn and Yahr score and a motor subscale of the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale score.

Questionnaires

The referring neurologists were required to complete diagnosis and management questionnaires at baseline and after the release of the AV-133 PET scan results.

The baseline questionnaire detailed the current management; the investigations completed; the most likely diagnosis from 6 categories (psychosomatic, dystonia, neurodegenerative, drug-induced, cerebrovascular disease, other [including essential tremor]); and the confidence, expressed as a percentage, in that diagnosis. If the clinician thought the diagnosis was a neurodegenerative disorder, they were required to specify whether this was thought to be PD, multiple-system atrophy, progressive supranuclear palsy, cortical basal ganglionic degeneration, uncertain type, or other. Their confidence in the specific neurodegenerative disorder diagnosis was also recorded.

Details of proposed long-term management, including medication plan, referral to other health providers, and follow-up visit frequency, were also recorded. Subsequent questionnaires were issued after the scan results were released and the management impact determined on these same areas.

Management Impact

Outcome measures were defined as high, moderate, or low management impact. Management impact was defined as high if there was a change in diagnostic category from a progressive neurodegenerative disorder to a nondegenerative disorder or vice versa after the PET scan results, moderate if there was a resultant change in medication, or low if the results confirmed clinical diagnosis or the result was discrepant and ignored.

Confidence in diagnosis was rated into 3 categories as possible (<50%), likely (>50%), and highly likely/definite (>90%) both before and after the release of scan results.

PET Acquisition

A 20-min emission PET scan was obtained 2 h after intravenous administration of approximately 250 MBq of 18F-AV133. The images were reconstructed using a 3-dimensional row-action maximum-likelihood algorithm (15) and were corrected for attenuation using a transmission scan from a rotating 137Cs source.

Image Analysis

As previously reported, tissue ratios for the caudate nuclei and anterior and posterior putamen were calculated using the primary visual cortex as a reference region, and compared with a locally derived reference range (Fig. 1) (21). A reduction of more than 50% in the most affected posterior putamen compared with the mean of a previously obtained normal control group (Fig. 2) was considered consistent with iPD or PD plus syndrome. This cutoff was based on observations from histopathologic studies that have documented loss of more than 50% of dopamine terminal markers in the posterior putamen in early symptomatic PD cases (22).

FIGURE 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1.

Representative 18F-AV-133 VMAT2 PET images of a normal age-matched volunteer (A) showing symmetric distribution of the tracer in basal ganglia, and PD patient (B) showing marked reduced and asymmetric tracer retention in basal ganglia, more pronounced in left putamen. Images were quantified using predefined region-of-interest template (C) that was applied on spatially normalized 18F-AV-133 images. Region-of-interest template sampled caudate nuclei, anterior and posterior putamen, and primary visual cortex that was used as reference region.

FIGURE 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 2.

SUV ratios of posterior putamen in normal controls (blue), CUPS with normal scan findings (CUPS-N) (green), and CUPS with abnormal scan findings (CUPS-AbN) (red).

RESULTS

Patient Demographics

The study consisted of 47 participants. Patient demographics are displayed in Table 1. There were 25 men (53%) and 22 women (47%) who ranged in age from 21 to 80 y. The mean age was 56.9 y. Only 1 participant had a Hoehn and Yahr score of zero, and no one had a score of 4.0 or 5.0. The mean baseline Mini–Mental State Examination score was 29, and no participant had a score below 25.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Patient Demographics

Diagnosis Before Scanning

Most patients (30 [64%]) were initially diagnosed as having neurodegenerative disease, as seen in Table 2. Of these, 20 were thought to have iPD, 7 unknown, 1 multiple-system atrophy, 1 progressive supranuclear palsy, and 1 other. Seven (15%) patients were thought to have a psychogenic condition; 4 (9%) were diagnosed as dystonia and 3 (6%) as drug-induced. Three patients were thought to have essential tremor (classified as other).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Scan Results and Diagnosis Before and After Results

Scan Findings

Twenty-two patients (47%) had abnormal scan findings (i.e., more than 50% reduction in 18F-AV133 uptake in the posterior putamen). In these abnormal scan findings, reduction was more than 80% in 14, 60%–79% in 5, and 51%–59% in 2 (Fig. 2). Age correction was applied but had no impact on the measures.

Diagnosis Change

Data for the diagnosis change was obtained from the management impact questionnaires. More than 75% of the postscan release questionnaires were completed within 4 mo of the baseline questionnaire, and all were returned within a year.

The initial diagnosis was changed in 12 (26%) patients after the release of the scan results. One of these was a change from dystonia to psychogenic and so was not considered as high impact based on our definition. Of the normal scan findings, the diagnosis was changed in 36% (9/25), and that value was 9% (2/22) for the abnormal scan findings.

Medication Change

With regard to medications, 53% (25/47) of the participants had changes to their regimen after the scan results were released. When the scan results were abnormal, 54.5% (12/22) had change, predominantly an increase in PD treatment, whereas 52% (13/25) of those with a normal scan finding had change, predominantly withdrawal of PD medications.

Management Impact and Diagnostic Confidence

Management impact was high in 23%, moderate in 38%, and low in 39% of patients (Fig. 3). Before the PET scan, clinician confidence was high (very likely/definite) for only 11% of the patients, but increased to 81% after the release of the scan results. Overall, there was an increase in diagnostic confidence in 74% of patients after the scan.

FIGURE 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 3.

Postscan management impact.

Confidence in the diagnosis increased after scanning, as illustrated in Table 3. This increase in confidence occurred whether the scan results were abnormal (16/22 or 73%) or normal (19/25 or 76%). In addition, 4 of the 25 (16%) normal scan findings resulted in a decrease in confidence with or without a change in diagnosis. This was only the case for 1 of the 22 abnormal scan results (4.5%).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3

Clinical Confidence Before and After Scanning

DISCUSSION

This study sought to determine whether the result of VMAT2 imaging with 18F-AV133 affected the diagnosis and clinical management of patients with CUPS. Our findings indicated a moderate to high impact in 61% of the cases (38% moderate and 23% high impact). We obtained an increase in diagnostic confidence in 74% of cases after the scan result was released and a 23% change in diagnosis.

These findings are comparable to studies using the SPECT DAT imaging agent 123I FP-CIT (DaTscan) when assessing loss of striatal dopaminergic innervation in CUPS. Seifert et al. reported that the DaTscan result led to a change of diagnosis in 31% and impacted clinical management in 58% of their patients (23). This is comparable to our values of 23% diagnosis change and 61% impact (combined moderate and high). However, their study was retrospective compared with our prospective design. Løkkegaard et al. demonstrated that the results of DaTscan led to a change of either diagnosis or clinical management in 27% of patients (24).

Clinician confidence was also affected by the 18F-AV133 scans. Clinician confidence increased in 74% of the cases after the scan result was revealed. DaTscan studies conducted by both Kupsch et al. (25) and Seifert et al. (23) also demonstrated significant changes in confidence in diagnosis after release of results. Interestingly, Kupsch et al. followed up after 4 wk, 12 wk, and 1 y and reported a further increase in confidence in the diagnosis at each follow-up interval (25), indicating that diagnosis assisted by striatal dopaminergic innervation imaging remained robust over time.

In our study, clinician confidence was equally increased whether the scan was normal or abnormal. This contrasts with the findings by Catafau et al. (7) in their study with DaTscan. They found an increase in confidence when the scan results were abnormal but a decrease in confidence when the scan results were normal (7).

The medication regimen was affected in 53% of the patients. The changes ranged from commencement of a new agent and cessation of an agent to change in the dose. Studies conducted with DaTscan also attributed a significant portion of their management change after scanning to medication changes (7,23–25).

Of the 22 patients with abnormal scan findings, 14 had a reduction in VMAT2 binding compared with the mean of controls, of more than 80%. This highlights the fact that diagnostic uncertainty can manifest even with a high degree of dopaminergic loss.

We chose a reduction in relative binding in the posterior putamen of greater than 50% to be abnormal. This value was chosen because previous postmortem studies have shown that a reduction of about 50% of dopaminergic neurons was necessary to produce clinical symptoms sufficient for the diagnosis of PD to be made (22). In our group, 50% reduction corresponds to 3 SDs below the mean of a reference group consisting of healthy normal adults who underwent VMAT2 PET imaging with 18F-AV133. As such, we believe that we are justified in using that value for this application though it would not be appropriate if preclinical detection of iPD is the goal.

There were some limitations to this study. First, there was no pathologic confirmation of the diagnosis in those with abnormal scans nor was there confirmation from longitudinal clinical follow-up. Prior studies have demonstrated a high concordance of DaTscan findings with postmortem diagnosis, and similar studies would be useful for VMAT2 imaging.

The study population was generally referred from movement disorder specialists in Melbourne, and so the demographics of the study participants reflect that of the local, predominantly Caucasian, population. There was no control arm in this study such as CUPS patients without VMAT2 imaging. Therefore, it is possible that diagnosis and clinician confidence changed because of the passage of time or repeated clinical assessment. A controlled study is needed to address this issue.

The findings in this study provide further evidence for the use of imaging as a complementary aide in managing CUPS. Although the findings are similar to those obtained with the SPECT imaging agent DaTscan, 18F-AV133 PET has logistic advantages including shorter uptake and scanning times and no patient preparation. 18F-AV133 PET also produces high-quality images that allow more accurate quantification, and this may be important if monitoring change over time as in therapeutic drug trials.

CONCLUSION

Significant impact in management and confidence in the diagnosis was derived from imaging VMAT2 with 18F-AV133 and PET in patients with CUPS.

DISCLOSURE

This was an investigator-initiated study supported by a grant from Avid Radiopharmaceuticals. This study was also supported in part by funds from the Austin Hospital Medical Research Foundation. Christopher Rowe, MD, has received research grants from GE Healthcare, Piramal Imaging, Navidea, and Avid Radiopharmaceuticals. Victor L. Villemagne, MD, has been an honorary speaker for Avid Radiopharmaceuticals. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Acknowledgments

We thank Drs. Andrew Evans, David Williams, John Drago, Andrew Hughes, John Merory, Katrina Reardon, and Katya Kotschet for their role in patient recruitment.

Footnotes

  • Published online May 10, 2017.

  • © 2017 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Kasten M,
    2. Chade A,
    3. Tanner CM
    . Epidemiology of Parkinson’s disease. Handb Clin Neurol. 2007;83:129–151.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Twelves D,
    2. Perkins KS,
    3. Counsell C
    . Systematic review of incidence studies of Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 2003;18:19–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Hughes AJ,
    2. Daniel SE,
    3. Lees AJ
    . Improved accuracy of clinical diagnosis of Lewy body Parkinson’s disease. Neurology. 2001;57:1497–1499.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.
    1. Rajput AH,
    2. Rozdilsky B,
    3. Rajput A
    . Accuracy of clinical diagnosis in Parkinsonism: a prospective study. Can J Neurol Sci. 1991;18:275–278.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Hughes AJ,
    2. Daniel SE,
    3. Kilford L,
    4. Lees AJ
    . Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson’s disease: a clinico-pathological study of 100 cases. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1992;55:181–184.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Cummings JL,
    2. Henchcliffe C,
    3. Schaier S,
    4. Simuni T,
    5. Waxman A,
    6. Kemp P
    . The role of dopaminergic imaging in patients with symptoms of dopaminergic system neurodegeneration. Brain. 2011;134:3146–3166.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Catafau AM,
    2. Tolosa E
    . DaTSCAN Clinically Uncertain Parkinsonian Syndromes Study Group. Impact of dopamine transporter SPECT using 123I-ioflupane on diagnosis and management of patients with clinically uncertain Parkinsonian syndromes. Mov Disord. 2004;19:1175–1182.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Jennings DL,
    2. Seibyl JP,
    3. Oakes D,
    4. Eberly S,
    5. Murphy J,
    6. Marek K
    . (123I) beta-CIT and single-photon emission computed tomographic imaging vs clinical evaluation in Parkinsonian syndrome: unmasking an early diagnosis. Arch Neurol. 2004;61:1224–1229.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.
    1. Ravina B,
    2. Eidelberg D,
    3. Ahlskog JE,
    4. et al
    . The role of radiotracer imaging in Parkinson disease. Neurology. 2005;64:208–215.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.
    1. Wong DF,
    2. Yung B,
    3. Dannals RF,
    4. et al
    . In vivo imaging of baboon and human dopamine transporters by positron emission tomography using [11C] WIN 35,428. Synapse. 1993;15:130–142.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.
    1. Villemagne V,
    2. Yuan J,
    3. Wong DF,
    4. et al
    . Brain dopamine neurotoxicity in baboons treated with doses of methamphetamine comparable to those recreationally abused by humans: evidence from [11C] WIN-35,428 positron emission tomography studies and direct in vitro determinations. J Neurosci. 1998;18:419–427.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.
    1. Pirker W,
    2. Djamshidian S,
    3. Asenbaum S,
    4. et al
    . Progression of dopaminergic degeneration in Parkinson’s disease and atypical Parkinsonism: a longitudinal b-CIT SPECT study. Mov Disord. 2002;17:45–53.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.
    1. Frey KA,
    2. Koeppe RA,
    3. Kilbourn MR,
    4. et al
    . Presynaptic monoaminergic vesicles in Parkinson’s disease and normal aging. Ann Neurol. 1996;40:873–884.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Stoessl AJ
    . Positron emission tomography in premotor Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2007;13(suppl 3):S421–S424.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Okamura N,
    2. Villemagne VL,
    3. Drago J,
    4. et al
    . In vivo measurement of vesicular monoamine transporter type 2 density in Parkinson disease with 18F-AV-133. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:223–228.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Nirenberg MJ,
    2. Chan J,
    3. Liu Y,
    4. Edwards RH,
    5. Pickel VM
    . Ultrastructural localization of the vesicular monoamine transporter-2 in midbrain dopaminergic neurons: potential sites for somatodendritic storage and release of dopamine. J Neurosci. 1996;16:4135–4145.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Martin WR,
    2. Wieler M,
    3. Stoessl AJ,
    4. Schulzer M
    . Dihydrotetrabenazine positron emission tomography imaging in early, untreated Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol. 2008;63:388–394.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Chen MK,
    2. Kuwabara H,
    3. Zhou Y,
    4. et al
    . VMAT2 and dopamine neuron loss in a primate model of Parkinson’s disease. J Neurochem. 2008;105:78–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Kung MP,
    2. Hou C,
    3. Goswami R,
    4. Ponde DE,
    5. Kilbourn MR,
    6. Kung HF
    . Characterization of optically resolved 9-fluoropropyl-dihydrotetrabenazine as a potential PET imaging agent targeting vesicular monoamine transporters. Nucl Med Biol. 2007;34:239–246.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Goswami R,
    2. Ponde DE,
    3. Kung MP,
    4. Hou C,
    5. Kilbourn MR,
    6. Kung HF
    . Fluoroalkyl derivatives of dihydrotetrabenazine as positron emission tomography imaging agents targeting vesicular monoamine transporters. Nucl Med Biol. 2006;33:685–694.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Villemagne VL,
    2. Okamura N,
    3. Pejoska S,
    4. et al
    . Differential diagnosis in Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy bodies via VMAT2 and amyloid imaging. Neurodegener Dis. 2012;10:161–165.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Kordower JH,
    2. Olanow CW,
    3. Dodiya HB,
    4. et al
    . Disease duration and the integrity of the nigrostriatal system in Parkinson’s disease. Brain. 2013;136(pt 8):2419–2431.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Seifert KD,
    2. Weiner JI
    . The impact of DaTscan on the diagnosis and management of movement disorders: a retrospective study. Am J Neurodegener Dis. 2013;2:29–34.
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    1. Løkkegaard A,
    2. Werdelin LM,
    3. Friberg L
    . Clinical impact of diagnostic SPET investigations with a dopamine re-uptake ligand. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:1623–1629.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Kupsch AR,
    2. Bajaj N,
    3. Weiland F,
    4. et al
    . Impact of DaTscan SPECT imaging on clinical management, diagnosis, confidence of diagnosis, quality of life, health resource use and safety in patients with clinically uncertain Parkinsonian syndromes: a prospective 1-year follow-up of an open-label controlled study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2012;83:620–628.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  • Received for publication December 24, 2016.
  • Accepted for publication April 13, 2017.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 58 (11)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 58, Issue 11
November 1, 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Management Impact of Imaging Brain Vesicular Monoamine Transporter Type 2 in Clinically Uncertain Parkinsonian Syndrome with 18F-AV133 and PET
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Management Impact of Imaging Brain Vesicular Monoamine Transporter Type 2 in Clinically Uncertain Parkinsonian Syndrome with 18F-AV133 and PET
Paschal K. Alexander, Yenni Lie, Gareth Jones, Chomalaven Sivaratnam, Svetlana Bozinvski, Rachel S. Mulligan, Kenneth Young, Victor L. Villemagne, Christopher C. Rowe
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Nov 2017, 58 (11) 1815-1820; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.116.189019

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Management Impact of Imaging Brain Vesicular Monoamine Transporter Type 2 in Clinically Uncertain Parkinsonian Syndrome with 18F-AV133 and PET
Paschal K. Alexander, Yenni Lie, Gareth Jones, Chomalaven Sivaratnam, Svetlana Bozinvski, Rachel S. Mulligan, Kenneth Young, Victor L. Villemagne, Christopher C. Rowe
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Nov 2017, 58 (11) 1815-1820; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.116.189019
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • DISCLOSURE
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • This Month in JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Using 18F-AV-133 VMAT2 PET Imaging to Monitor Progressive Nigrostriatal Degeneration in Parkinson Disease
  • Diagnostic accuracy of imaging brain vesicular monoamine transporter type 2 (VMAT2) in clinically uncertain parkinsonian syndrome (CUPS): a 3-year follow-up study in community patients
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

Neurology

  • Dopamine D1 Receptor Agonist PET Tracer Development: Assessment in Nonhuman Primates
  • Hypermetabolism on Pediatric PET Scans of Brain Glucose Metabolism: What Does It Signify?
  • TauIQ: A Canonical Image Based Algorithm to Quantify Tau PET Scans
Show more Neurology

Clinical

  • Addition of 131I-MIBG to PRRT (90Y-DOTATOC) for Personalized Treatment of Selected Patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors
  • SUVs Are Adequate Measures of Lesional 18F-DCFPyL Uptake in Patients with Low Prostate Cancer Disease Burden
  • Hypermetabolism on Pediatric PET Scans of Brain Glucose Metabolism: What Does It Signify?
Show more Clinical

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • management impact
  • Molecular imaging
  • Parkinson disease
  • PET
  • VMAT2
SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire