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
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

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

Prediction of Individual Clinical Outcome in MCI by Means of Genetic Assessment and 18F-FDG PET

Alexander Drzezga, Timo Grimmer, Matthias Riemenschneider, Nicola Lautenschlager, Hartwig Siebner, Panagiotis Alexopoulus, Satoshi Minoshima, Markus Schwaiger and Alexander Kurz
Journal of Nuclear Medicine October 2005, 46 (10) 1625-1632;
Alexander Drzezga
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Timo Grimmer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthias Riemenschneider
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicola Lautenschlager
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hartwig Siebner
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Panagiotis Alexopoulus
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Satoshi Minoshima
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Markus Schwaiger
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexander Kurz
  • 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

Article Figures & Data

Figures

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

    Baseline 18F-FDG PET findings in MCI patient who showed clinical progression to DAT within 16 mo. Surface projections of statistical abnormalities (z scores) as compared with healthy control population are displayed. Predefined anatomic surface ROIs are depicted in white color. Significant hypometabolism in bilateral temporoparietal and frontal cortex and in the posterior cingulate cortex is apparent. (A) Right lateral. (B) Left lateral. (C) Left medial. (D) Right medial.

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

    Correct prediction concerning emergence of DAT in MCI patients. True- and false-positive and -negative findings of PET, APOE genotype, and combined PET/APOE classifications. PET: MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan at baseline were classified as test positive; APOE: MCI patients with APOE ε4–positive genotype were classified as test positive; PET and APOE: MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan and APOE ε4–positive genotype at baseline were classified as test positive; PET or APOE: MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan or APOE ε4–positive genotype were classified as test positive.

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

    ROC analysis for PET, APOE genotyping, and combined approaches. PET: MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan at baseline were classified as test positive; APOE: MCI patients with APOE ε4–positive genotype were classified as test positive; PET and APOE: MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan and APOE ε4–positive genotype at baseline were classified as test positive; PET or APOE: MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan or APOE ε4–positive genotype were classified as test positive.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Characteristics of MCI Patients (n = 30)

    Follow-up diagnosisDATNo DATP value
    n1218—
    Sex (F/M)6/610/80.94
    Age at baseline*(y)74.7 ± 4.767.6 ± 8.20.01
    MMSE score at baseline*25.9 ± 2.127.6 ± 1.50.02
    MMSE score at follow-up*22.6 ± 2.5†27.2 ± 2.2<0.001
    APOE genotype (ε4–positive/negative)9/38/100.20
    PET at baseline (AD: typical/atypical)11/12/16<0.001
    Duration of symptoms* (y)3 ± 1.72.3 ± 2.20.35
    Years of education*12.4 ± 3.711.1 ± 3.20.31
    • ↵* Data are presented as mean ± SD

    • ↵† Significant difference between baseline and follow-up (P < 0.05)

    • No DAT = MCI patients who did not fulfill criteria for DAT after 16 mo of follow-up.

    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Statistical Evaluation

    Diagnostic approachPETAPOEPET and APOEPET or APOE
    Sensitivity (%)927567100
    Specificity (%)895610044
    Test accuracy (%)90638767
    PPV (%)855310055
    NPV (%)947782100
    • PET = MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan at baseline were classified as test positive; APOE = MCI patients with APOE ε4–positive genotype were classified as test positive; PET and APOE = MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan and APOE ε4–positive genotype at baseline were classified as test positive; PET or APOE = MCI patients with Alzheimer-suggestive PET scan or APOE ε4–positive genotype were classified as test positive.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 46 (10)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 46, Issue 10
October 1, 2005
  • Table of Contents
  • 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.
Prediction of Individual Clinical Outcome in MCI by Means of Genetic Assessment and 18F-FDG 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
Prediction of Individual Clinical Outcome in MCI by Means of Genetic Assessment and 18F-FDG PET
Alexander Drzezga, Timo Grimmer, Matthias Riemenschneider, Nicola Lautenschlager, Hartwig Siebner, Panagiotis Alexopoulus, Satoshi Minoshima, Markus Schwaiger, Alexander Kurz
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Oct 2005, 46 (10) 1625-1632;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Prediction of Individual Clinical Outcome in MCI by Means of Genetic Assessment and 18F-FDG PET
Alexander Drzezga, Timo Grimmer, Matthias Riemenschneider, Nicola Lautenschlager, Hartwig Siebner, Panagiotis Alexopoulus, Satoshi Minoshima, Markus Schwaiger, Alexander Kurz
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Oct 2005, 46 (10) 1625-1632;
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
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • THIS MONTH IN JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • 18F-FDG PET Imaging in Neurodegenerative Dementing Disorders: Insights into Subtype Classification, Emerging Disease Categories, and Mixed Dementia with Copathologies
  • Predicting the Progression of Mild Cognitive Impairment Using Machine Learning: A Systematic, Quantitative and Critical Review
  • VGF in cerebrospinal fluid, when combined with conventional biomarkers, enhances prediction of conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimers Disease
  • Is Tau Imaging More Than Just Upside-Down 18F-FDG Imaging?
  • Diagnostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT Versus MRI in the Setting of Antibody-Specific Autoimmune Encephalitis
  • Inclusion criteria provide heterogeneity in baseline profiles of patients with mild cognitive impairment: comparison of two prospective cohort studies
  • Predictive value of APOE-{varepsilon}4 allele for progression from MCI to AD-type dementia: a meta-analysis
  • Magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the prediction of early conversion from amnestic mild cognitive impairment to dementia: a prospective cohort study
  • Tarot decks and PET scans: Predicting the future of MCI
  • Comparing predictors of conversion and decline in mild cognitive impairment
  • Comparison of 18F-FDG and PiB PET in Cognitive Impairment
  • Effect of APOE genotype on amyloid plaque load and gray matter volume in Alzheimer disease
  • Fluorodeoxyglucose-Positron-Emission Tomography, Single-Photon Emission Tomography, and Structural MR Imaging for Prediction of Rapid Conversion to Alzheimer Disease in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Meta-Analysis
  • Multicenter Standardized 18F-FDG PET Diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment, Alzheimer's Disease, and Other Dementias
  • Positron emission tomography imaging in dementia
  • Maternal family history of Alzheimer's disease predisposes to reduced brain glucose metabolism
  • Role of Neuroimaging in Alzheimer's Disease, with Emphasis on Brain Perfusion SPECT
  • 18F-FDG PET Database of Longitudinally Confirmed Healthy Elderly Individuals Improves Detection of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Feasibility of Ultra-Low-Activity 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging Using a Long–Axial-Field-of-View PET/CT System
  • Cardiac Presynaptic Sympathetic Nervous Function Evaluated by Cardiac PET in Patients with Chronotropic Incompetence Without Heart Failure
  • Validation and Evaluation of a Vendor-Provided Head Motion Correction Algorithm on the uMI Panorama PET/CT System
Show more Clinical Investigations

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire