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
Meeting ReportPoster - PhysicianPharm

Further evaluation of 18F-MK-6240 reference region kinetics

Jessie Fanglu Fu, Cristina Lois, Justin Sanchez, Alex Becker, Zoe Rubinstein, Hasan Sari, Michelle Farrell, Marc Normandin, Nicolas Guehl, Georges El Fakhri, Keith Johnson and Julie Price
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2021, 62 (supplement 1) 1058;
Jessie Fanglu Fu
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
1Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Research, Massachusetts General Hospital Charlestown MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cristina Lois
3Gordon Center for Medical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Justin Sanchez
3Gordon Center for Medical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alex Becker
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
3Gordon Center for Medical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zoe Rubinstein
3Gordon Center for Medical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hasan Sari
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
1Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Research, Massachusetts General Hospital Charlestown MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michelle Farrell
4Department of Neurology Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marc Normandin
3Gordon Center for Medical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicolas Guehl
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
3Gordon Center for Medical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Georges El Fakhri
3Gordon Center for Medical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Keith Johnson
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
3Gordon Center for Medical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julie Price
2Department of Radiology Harvard Medical School Boston MA United States
1Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Research, Massachusetts General Hospital Charlestown MA United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

1058

Introduction: 18F-MK-6240 is a second-generation positron emission tomography (PET) tau imaging agent that has demonstrated higher signal-to-noise, lower off-target binding, and in-vivo kinetics that are more favourable than previous tau PET radioligands. Reference tissue methods have been used to quantify 18F-MK-6240 binding, using cerebellar gray matter (CerGM) based reference regions1-4. However, contamination of CerGM, by extra-axial signal, remains a challenge for the detection of emergent specific tau signal. In this work, we further explored alternative reference regions less prone to extra-axial contamination: eroded CerGM and pons1,2,3.

Methods: Dynamic 120 min 18F-MK-6240 (180±10 MBq, GE Discovery-MI PET/CT) PET imaging was performed in 19 cognitively unimpaired control participants (CN, age 70±10 years) and 5 individuals diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment (4 MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease (age 64±6 years). Dynamic PET data were reconstructed with the ordered-subset expectation-maximization algorithm (5 iterations, 16 subsets) including time-of-flight information and point spread function modeling. Reconstructed PET data were motion corrected and coregistered to the corresponding T1-weighted magnetic resonance images with FSL Flirt. Time activity curves were generated using Freesurfer segmentations in 4 reference regions (CerGM, CerGM with 2mm and 3mm erosion from the outer edge to reduce contamination from adjacent high uptake areas, and pons) and 7 target regions (entorhinal, parahippocampal, amygdala, hippocampus, precuneus, inferior temporal and lateral occipital). Standardized uptake value tissue ratios (SUVR) were computed using 90-110 min of dynamic data. Distribution volume ratios (DVR) were computed by multilinear reference tissue modeling (MRTM2, t*=30min, k2’=0.04). Analysis of variance (ANOVA, p<0.05) and coefficients-of-variation were used to compare the mean and variability of SUVR and DVR values computed using different reference regions. Correlations between SUVR and DVR values were evaluated using linear regression models. Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons was applied.

Results: SUVRCerGM and SUVRerodedCerGM curves exhibited most consistent plateaus across target regions after 90 min. SUVRPons curves were still increasing at 120 min in the target tau-binding regions-of-interest. The SUVRPons and DVRPons values were approximately 2-fold greater than SUVRCerGM and DVRCerGM (p < 10-6). Coefficients-of-variation of SUVRPons (0.21±0.05) and DVRPons (0.21±0.06) were also greater (not significant - n.s.) than SUVRCerGM(0.20±0.1) and DVRCerGM (0.14±0.04)across all target regions. Mean SUVRerodedCerGM and DVRerodedCerGM values were slightly greater (n.s.) than mean SUVRCerGM (16%) and DVRCerGM (5%) values. The SUVR and DVR values obtained with different reference regions were highly correlated in all target regions (R2 > 0.96, p < 10-4), with positive bias of 1.34±0.13 in SUVRCerGM and 1.34±0.18 in SUVRPons values.

Conclusions: Eroded CerCM reference regions performed similarly to CerGM, while potentially reducing contamination from extra-axial and cortical signal. Using pons as the reference region in 18F-MK-6240 MRTM2 analyses resulted in greater dynamic range (magnitudes) and variability similar to that for CerGM for both SUVR and DVR measures. Using reference regions that generate larger dynamic ranges of outcome measures (e.g. pons) may improve the sensitivity for longitudinal tracking of tau accumulation in subjects with low tau accumulation; however, further studies are needed to better characterize factors that impact the specific and non-specific 18F-MK-6240 kinetics and the bias in outcome measures in target regions.

Previous
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 62, Issue supplement 1
May 1, 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
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.
Further evaluation of 18F-MK-6240 reference region kinetics
(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
Further evaluation of 18F-MK-6240 reference region kinetics
Jessie Fanglu Fu, Cristina Lois, Justin Sanchez, Alex Becker, Zoe Rubinstein, Hasan Sari, Michelle Farrell, Marc Normandin, Nicolas Guehl, Georges El Fakhri, Keith Johnson, Julie Price
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2021, 62 (supplement 1) 1058;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Further evaluation of 18F-MK-6240 reference region kinetics
Jessie Fanglu Fu, Cristina Lois, Justin Sanchez, Alex Becker, Zoe Rubinstein, Hasan Sari, Michelle Farrell, Marc Normandin, Nicolas Guehl, Georges El Fakhri, Keith Johnson, Julie Price
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2021, 62 (supplement 1) 1058;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

Poster - PhysicianPharm

  • Preliminary result of Texture Analysis on prediction of overall outcome of neuroendocrine tumors based on pre-therapy heterogeneity of somatostatin receptors on 68Ga Dotatate PET/CT scans.
  • Correlation between electrosynchronization and mechanical synchronization in patients with chronic heart failure
  • Comparison of regadenoson and dypiridamole myocardial blood flow and coronary flow reserve hyperemic response by non-invasive quantitative N-13 ammonia PET.
Show more Poster - PhysicianPharm

Neurology and Psychiatry

  • SV2A as a Biomarker for Spinal Cord Injury: PET Imaging with [18F]SynVesT-1 in a Rat Model of Contusion
  • Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) MRI in patients with behavioral-variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) - Incremental value to brain PET?
  • Increased sigma-1 receptor binding observed in the pain matrix of patients suffering from chronic pain.
Show more Neurology and Psychiatry

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire