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 ArticleClinical Investigations

In Vivo Assessment of Brain White Matter Inflammation in Multiple Sclerosis with 18F-PBR111 PET

Alessandro Colasanti, Qi Guo, Nils Muhlert, Paolo Giannetti, Mayca Onega, Rexford D. Newbould, Olga Ciccarelli, Stuart Rison, Charlotte Thomas, Richard Nicholas, Paolo A. Muraro, Omar Malik, David R. Owen, Paola Piccini, Roger N. Gunn, Eugenii A. Rabiner and Paul M. Matthews
Journal of Nuclear Medicine July 2014, 55 (7) 1112-1118; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.113.135129
Alessandro Colasanti
1Division of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
2Imanova Centre for Imaging Sciences, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Qi Guo
2Imanova Centre for Imaging Sciences, London, United Kingdom
3Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nils Muhlert
4UCL Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
5School of Psychology and Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paolo Giannetti
1Division of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mayca Onega
2Imanova Centre for Imaging Sciences, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rexford D. Newbould
2Imanova Centre for Imaging Sciences, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Olga Ciccarelli
4UCL Institute of Neurology, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stuart Rison
6Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Charlotte Thomas
6Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard Nicholas
1Division of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
6Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paolo A. Muraro
1Division of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Omar Malik
6Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David R. Owen
1Division of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paola Piccini
1Division of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roger N. Gunn
1Division of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
2Imanova Centre for Imaging Sciences, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eugenii A. Rabiner
2Imanova Centre for Imaging Sciences, London, United Kingdom
3Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paul M. Matthews
1Division of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
7Neurosciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

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

    (A) T2 FLAIR image of representative MS patient (patient 1, Supplemental Table 1). Hyperintense areas correspond to demyelinating lesions. (B) Lesion (dark blue) and perilesional areas (light blue) corresponding to intersection of 6-mm-diameter sphere traced around lesions within image plane. (C) Nonlesional voxels with MTR values ranging between 90% and 98% of mean MTR of nonlesional WM tissue (NLLM) (copper).

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

    (A) 18F-PBR111 VT in whole WM of MS patients and genotype- and age-matched healthy control subjects. Lines in middle of boxes are median values, whereas hinges represent 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. Whiskers represent maximum and minimum values. Contrast between MS patients and healthy controls showed trend for higher 18F-PBR111 Embedded Image in MS patients (Wilcoxon rank P = 0.062). (B) Relationship between whole WM 18F-PBR111 VT and disease duration in MS patients for patients with different rs6971 genotypes (Spearman partial correlation in HABs: ρ = 0.86; P < 0.05, corrected for age).

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

    18F-PBR111 uptake in healthy volunteers and across MS patient ROIs. Lines in middle of boxes are median values, whereas hinges represent 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. Whiskers represent maximum and minimum values. Between-group contrasts showed that MS patients’ 18F-PBR111 Embedded Image and Embedded Image were greater than healthy volunteers’ Embedded Image (Wilcoxon rank P < 0.05). Within–MS patient contrasts showed Embedded Image was greater than Embedded Image and Embedded Image was greater than Embedded Image (Wilcoxon rank P < 0.05), and Embedded Image was greater than Embedded Image (Wilcoxon rank P < 0.005).

  • FIGURE 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 4.

    Relative 18F-PBR111 uptake (relative to NLHM WM) in NLLM WM, in individual T2 FLAIR lesions, and in perilesional volumes for MS patients studied. Ordinant represents relative difference in 18F-PBR111 VT in lesions (♢), in perilesional volumes (●), and in NLLM WM (*) relative to normal-appearing WM (NLHM WM). On abscissa, MS patients (Supplemental Table 1) are separately indicated.

  • FIGURE 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 5.

    T2 FLAIR images (A and D), 18F-PBR111 VT parametric maps (B and E) overlaid (in warm colors) on T2 FLAIR images, and overlap between T2 FLAIR lesions (marked in blue) and 18F-PBR111 VT (in warm colors) (C and F) from 2 illustrative patients. Lower threshold for VT parametric maps corresponds to value of 18F-PBR111 VT in NLHM volume for each of 2 patients. Upper threshold is twice VT in NLHM. Upper row illustrates patient with recent active disease (Supplemental Table 1, patient 9). Here, T2 FLAIR hyperintense lesional areas correspond to areas of increased 18F-PBR111 signal. Lower row illustrates patient (Supplemental Table 1, patient 4) with relatively benign disease course showing focal regions of increased 18F-PBR111 VT that correspond poorly to T2 FLAIR hyperintense areas.

  • FIGURE 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 6.

    Positive relationship between MSSSs and 18F-PBR111 uptake in lesions (expressed relative to that in normal-appearing WM) (Spearman ρ = 0.62, P ≤ 0.05).

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Supplemental Data

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • Supplemental Data
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 55 (7)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 55, Issue 7
July 1, 2014
  • 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.
In Vivo Assessment of Brain White Matter Inflammation in Multiple Sclerosis with 18F-PBR111 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
In Vivo Assessment of Brain White Matter Inflammation in Multiple Sclerosis with 18F-PBR111 PET
Alessandro Colasanti, Qi Guo, Nils Muhlert, Paolo Giannetti, Mayca Onega, Rexford D. Newbould, Olga Ciccarelli, Stuart Rison, Charlotte Thomas, Richard Nicholas, Paolo A. Muraro, Omar Malik, David R. Owen, Paola Piccini, Roger N. Gunn, Eugenii A. Rabiner, Paul M. Matthews
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jul 2014, 55 (7) 1112-1118; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.113.135129

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
In Vivo Assessment of Brain White Matter Inflammation in Multiple Sclerosis with 18F-PBR111 PET
Alessandro Colasanti, Qi Guo, Nils Muhlert, Paolo Giannetti, Mayca Onega, Rexford D. Newbould, Olga Ciccarelli, Stuart Rison, Charlotte Thomas, Richard Nicholas, Paolo A. Muraro, Omar Malik, David R. Owen, Paola Piccini, Roger N. Gunn, Eugenii A. Rabiner, Paul M. Matthews
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jul 2014, 55 (7) 1112-1118; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.113.135129
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
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • This Month in JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: New Insights
  • Quantitative magnetisation transfer imaging in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Natalizumab treatment reduces microglial activation in the white matter of the MS brain
  • 11C-PBR28 and 18F-PBR111 Detect White Matter Inflammatory Heterogeneity in Multiple Sclerosis
  • Imaging Microglial Activation with TSPO PET: Lighting Up Neurologic Diseases?
  • Imaging robust microglial activation after lipopolysaccharide administration in humans with PET
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • 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
  • Prognostic Role of 68Ga-PSMA11 PET–Based Response in Patients with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Taxane-Based Chemotherapy
Show more Clinical Investigations

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • multiple sclerosis
  • TSPO
  • microglia
  • lesion
  • PET
  • MTR
SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire