Evaluation of partial volume correction and analysis of longitudinal [18F]GTP1 tau PET imaging in Alzheimer's disease using linear mixed-effects models

Sandra M Sanabria Bohórquez,Suzanne Baker,Paul T Manser,Matteo Tonietto,Christopher Galli,Kristin R Wildsmith,Yixuan Zou,Geoffrey A Kerchner,Robby Weimer,Edmond Teng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnimg.2024.1355402
2024-03-28
Abstract:Purpose: We evaluated the impact of partial volume correction (PVC) methods on the quantification of longitudinal [18F]GTP1 tau positron-emission tomography (PET) in Alzheimer's disease and the suitability of describing the tau pathology burden temporal trajectories using linear mixed-effects models (LMEM). Methods: We applied van Cittert iterative deconvolution (VC), 2-compartment, and 3-compartment, and the geometric transfer matrix plus region-based voxelwise methods to data acquired in an Alzheimer's disease natural history study over 18 months at a single imaging site. We determined the optimal PVC method by comparing the standardized uptake value ratio change (%ΔSUVR) between diagnostic and tau burden-level groups and the longitudinal repeatability derived from the LMEM. The performance of LMEM analysis for calculating %ΔSUVR was evaluated in a natural history study and in a multisite clinical trial of semorinemab in prodromal to mild Alzheimer's disease by comparing results to traditional per-visit estimates. Results: The VC, 2-compartment, and 3-compartment PVC methods had similar performance, whereas region-based voxelwise overcorrected regions with a higher tau burden. The lowest within-subject variability and acceptable group separation scores were observed without PVC. The LMEM-derived %ΔSUVR values were similar to the per-visit estimates with lower variability. Conclusion: The results indicate that the tested PVC methods do not offer a clear advantage or improvement over non-PVC images for the quantification of longitudinal [18F]GTP1 PET data. LMEM offers a robust framework for the longitudinal tau PET quantification with low longitudinal test-retest variability. Clinical trial registration: NCT02640092 and NCT03289143.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?