Back

Quantification of ABP688 binding in human brain using cerebellum as reference region: biological interpretation and limitations

Milella, M. S.; minuzzi, l.; benkelfat, c.; soucy, j.-p.; kirlow, a.; Schirrmacher, e.; angle, m.; Verhaeghe, J.; massarweh, g.; reader, a. j.; aliaga, a.; Peixoto-Santos, J. E.; guiot, M.-C.; kobayashi, e.; rosa-neto, p.; Leyton, M.

2024-02-13 radiology and imaging
10.1101/2024.02.12.24302279 medRxiv
Show abstract

In vitro data from primates provide conflicting evidence about the cerebellums suitability as a reference region for quantifying type 5 metabotropic glutamate receptor (mGluR5) binding parameters with positron emission tomography (PET). To address this, we first measured mGluR5 density in postmortem human cerebellum using [3H]ABP688 autoradiography (n=5) and immunohistochemistry (n=6). Next, in vivo experiments were conducted in healthy volunteers (n=6) using a high-resolution PET scanner (HRRT) to compare [11C]ABP688 binding potential (BPND) values obtained with reference tissue methods and the two-tissue compartment model vs. metabolite-corrected arterial input function. The postmortem data showed that, relative to the hippocampus, the cerebellum had 26% less mGluR5 immunoreactivity and 94% fewer [3H]ABP688 binding sites. In vivo brain regional [11C]ABP688 BPND values using the cerebellum as a reference region were highly correlated with BPND values and distribution volumes derived by arterial input methods (R2 > 0.9). The absence of cerebellar allosteric binding sites might reflect the presence of distinct mGluR5 isoforms or conformational state. Together with our PET data, these results support the proposition that [11C]ABP688 BPND using cerebellum as a reference region provides accurate quantification of mGluR5 allosteric binding in vivo.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.