Sex correction improves the accuracy of clinical dopamine transporter imaging.
Dopamine transporter
Healthy
SPECT
Sex correction
Journal
EJNMMI research
ISSN: 2191-219X
Titre abrégé: EJNMMI Res
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101560946
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Aug 2021
23 Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
24
05
2021
accepted:
13
08
2021
entrez:
23
8
2021
pubmed:
24
8
2021
medline:
24
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In clinical diagnostic imaging, dopamine transporter (DAT) SPECT scans are commonly evaluated using automated semiquantitative analysis software. Age correction is routinely implemented, but usually no sex correction of DAT binding is performed. Since there are sex differences in presynaptic dopaminergic function, we investigated the effect of DAT sex correction in a sample of healthy volunteers who underwent brain [ Forty healthy elderly individuals (21 men and 19 women) underwent brain [ In the analysis without sex correction, compared to the mean ratio of the reference database, ten healthy individuals (8 men and 2 women) had abnormally low DAT binding ratios, and four individuals (3 men and 1 woman) had borderline low DAT binding ratios in at least one striatal region. When sex correction was implemented, the ratio of one individual was abnormal, and the ratio of one individual was borderline (both males). There were no clinically significant differences in motor or non-motor symptoms between healthy volunteers with abnormal and normal binding. A considerable number of elderly healthy male subjects can be interpreted to be dopaminergically abnormal if no sex correction of DAT binding is performed. Sex differences in striatal dopaminergic function should be taken into account when DAT imaging is used to assist clinical diagnostics in patients with suspected neurological disorders.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In clinical diagnostic imaging, dopamine transporter (DAT) SPECT scans are commonly evaluated using automated semiquantitative analysis software. Age correction is routinely implemented, but usually no sex correction of DAT binding is performed. Since there are sex differences in presynaptic dopaminergic function, we investigated the effect of DAT sex correction in a sample of healthy volunteers who underwent brain [
METHODS
METHODS
Forty healthy elderly individuals (21 men and 19 women) underwent brain [
RESULTS
RESULTS
In the analysis without sex correction, compared to the mean ratio of the reference database, ten healthy individuals (8 men and 2 women) had abnormally low DAT binding ratios, and four individuals (3 men and 1 woman) had borderline low DAT binding ratios in at least one striatal region. When sex correction was implemented, the ratio of one individual was abnormal, and the ratio of one individual was borderline (both males). There were no clinically significant differences in motor or non-motor symptoms between healthy volunteers with abnormal and normal binding.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
A considerable number of elderly healthy male subjects can be interpreted to be dopaminergically abnormal if no sex correction of DAT binding is performed. Sex differences in striatal dopaminergic function should be taken into account when DAT imaging is used to assist clinical diagnostics in patients with suspected neurological disorders.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34424408
doi: 10.1186/s13550-021-00825-3
pii: 10.1186/s13550-021-00825-3
pmc: PMC8382816
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
82Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021 May;48(5):1445-1459
pubmed: 33130960
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013 Jan;40(2):213-27
pubmed: 23160999
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013 Apr;40(4):565-73
pubmed: 23232506
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017 Mar;44(3):366-372
pubmed: 27544223
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011 Aug;38(8):1529-40
pubmed: 21468761
Neurobiol Aging. 2015 Apr;36(4):1757-1763
pubmed: 25697414
J Neurophysiol. 2012 Oct;108(8):2242-63
pubmed: 22832566
Eur Radiol. 2018 Apr;28(4):1756-1760
pubmed: 29164380
Brain. 2001 Jun;124(Pt 6):1125-30
pubmed: 11353728
Mov Disord. 2007 Oct 15;22(13):1901-11
pubmed: 17674410
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2020 Oct;91(10):1046-1054
pubmed: 32934108
Exp Neurol. 2014 Sep;259:44-56
pubmed: 24681088
Nucl Med Commun. 2019 Oct;40(10):1001-1004
pubmed: 31343608
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;78(8):819-24
pubmed: 17098842
Nat Rev Neurol. 2020 Feb;16(2):84-96
pubmed: 31900464
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018 Jul;45(8):1405-1416
pubmed: 29478082
Nucl Med Commun. 2013 Oct;34(10):978-89
pubmed: 23903558
Mov Disord. 2004 Oct;19(10):1175-82
pubmed: 15390019
Mov Disord. 2012 Jun;27(7):913-6
pubmed: 22729987
Eur J Nucl Med. 2000 Jul;27(7):867-9
pubmed: 10952500
Sci Rep. 2018 Mar 21;8(1):4924
pubmed: 29563547
Clin Nucl Med. 2015 Jul;40(7):615-6
pubmed: 26018714
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012 Nov;39(11):1778-83
pubmed: 22890804
Brain Sci. 2018 Aug 13;8(8):
pubmed: 30104506
Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2015 Aug;65:139-50
pubmed: 26028290
Front Neuroendocrinol. 2018 Jul;50:18-30
pubmed: 28974386
Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2015 Dec 05;3(1):21-6
pubmed: 26783547
Am J Psychiatry. 2001 Feb;158(2):308-11
pubmed: 11156817