Research ArticleClinical Investigations

Genetic and Environmental Influences on Regional Brain Uptake of 18F-FDG: A PET Study on Monozygotic and Dizygotic Twins

Shinichiro Watanabe, Hiroki Kato, Eku Shimosegawa and Jun Hatazawa
Journal of Nuclear Medicine March 2016, 57 (3) 392-397; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.164004

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • FIGURE 1.
    FIGURE 1.

    Representative SUV images of 2 monozygotic pairs, pair of 67-y-old female twins (A) and pair of 74-y-old male twins (B). Distribution of high-metabolic-activity regions and low-metabolic-activity regions is displayed on color scale. Right lateral (RT. LAT), left lateral (LT. LAT), superior (SUP), inferior (INF), anterior (ANT), posterior (POST), right medial (RT. MED), and left medial (LT. MED) projections are shown from left to right. In each panel, top row shows images of one twin and bottom row shows images of the other.

  • FIGURE 2.
    FIGURE 2.

    Representative SUV images of 2 dizygotic pairs, pair of 65-y-old female twins (A) and pair of 84-y-old male twins (B). Distribution of high-metabolic-activity regions and low-metabolic-activity regions is displayed on color scale. Right lateral (RT. LAT), left lateral (LT. LAT), superior (SUP), inferior (INF), anterior (ANT), posterior (POST), right medial (RT. MED), and left medial (LT. MED) projections are shown from left to right. In each panel, top row shows images of one twin and bottom row shows images of the other.

  • FIGURE 3.
    FIGURE 3.

    Similarity images of dizygotic and monozygotic pairs compared by control pairs. Average difference in SUV ratio (as percentage difference in control pairs) between members of dizygotic twins and monozygotic twins is displayed pixel by pixel on standard MR brain atlas in color scale. Average difference in SUV ratio between members of control pairs was set to be 100%.

Tables

  • TABLE 1

    Demographic Characteristics of Subject Pairs

    CharacteristicMonozygotic twinsDizygotic twins
    Pairs (n)40 (12 M/28 F)18 (9 M/9 F)
    Mean age ± SD (y)
     Male59.2 ± 13.273.7 ± 10.6
     Female60.7 ± 11.656.1 ± 14.5
  • TABLE 2

    ICCs for Each Lobarwise Region of Interest

    ICC
    Region of interestControlPDizygoticPMonozygoticPDifference*
    Left frontal lobe−0.26 (−0.54, 0.07)0.120.34 (0.02, 0.60)<0.050.45 (0.26, 0.61)<0.01NS
    Right frontal lobe0.17 (−0.17, 0.47)0.320.42 (0.11, 0.66)<0.050.57 (0.40, 0.70)<0.01NS
    Left parietal lobe−0.28 (−0.56, 0.06)0.10−0.11 (−0.42, 0.23)0.530.54 (0.36, 0.68)<0.01P < 0.001
    Right parietal lobe−0.31 (−0.58, 0.02)0.07−0.32 (−0.59, 0.01)0.050.53 (0.35, 0.67)<0.01P < 0.001
    Left temporal lobe−0.11 (−0.43, 0.22)0.510.00 (−0.33, 0.32)0.980.40 (0.20, 0.57)<0.01P < 0.05
    Right temporal lobe0.56 (0.28, 0.75)<0.010.53 (0.24, 0.73)<0.010.71 (0.59, 0.81)<0.01NS
    Left occipital lobe−0.17 (−0.47, 0.17)0.330.29 (−0.04, 0.57)0.080.44 (0.24, 0.60)<0.01NS
    Right occipital lobe0.02 (−0.31, 0.35)0.910.22 (−0.11, 0.51)0.190.33 (0.11, 0.51)<0.01NS
    Left limbic lobe0.32 (−0.01, 0.58)0.060.71 (0.49, 0.84)<0.010.73 (0.60, 0.82)<0.01NS
    Right limbic lobe0.63 (0.38, 0.79)<0.010.66 (0.42, 0.81)<0.010.68 (0.53, 0.78)<0.01NS

    • ↵* Difference between ICC of monozygotic and dizygotic pairs.

    • NS = not significant.

    • Data in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals.

Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

Keywords