Physiological Whole-Brain Distribution of [18F]FDOPA Uptake Index in Relation to Age and Gender: Results from a Voxel-Based Semi-quantitative Analysis
6-[18F]fluoro-l-DOPA ([18F]FDOPA), a positron emission tomography (PET) amino-acid tracer of brain decarboxylase activity, is used to assess the brain dopaminergic system. Using a voxel-based semi-quantitative analysis, this study aimed to determine whether a current brain uptake index of [18F]FDOPA, expressed relative to the occipital background level, varies according to age and gender.
One hundred and seventy-seven subjects were retrospectively included. A whole-brain statistical parametric mapping analysis of the [18F]FDOPA uptake index in parametric PET images was performed at a voxel threshold of p < 0.05 (corrected) and p < 0.005 (uncorrected, k cluster > 125).
Striatal uptake indices were influenced by age, negatively for the caudate nucleus and positively for the putamen, as well as by gender, with a lower left putaminal uptake index in women. Extra-striatal uptake indices were influenced by age, negatively for the frontal cortex and brainstem and positively for the occipital cortex and cerebellum, as well as by gender (diffuse increase in women).
The uptake index of [18F]FDOPA exhibited significant physiological variations according to age and gender and should therefore be considered for PET interpretation.
Key words[18F]FDOPA PET Quantitative analysis Age Gender Template
The authors thank Pierre Pothier for the critical review of the manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
This retrospective study was approved on June 27, 2017 by the local institutional review board (IRB) and the Ethics Committee (CPP Est III).
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 5.Kuwabara H, Cumming P, Reith J, Léger G, Diksic M, Evans AC, Gjedde A (1993) Human striatal L-dopa decarboxylase activity estimated in vivo using 6-[18F]fluoro-dopa and positron emission tomography: error analysis and application to normal subjects. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 13:43–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Jaimini A, Tripathi M, D’Souza MM, Panwar P, Sharma R, Mehta S, Pandey S, Saw S, Singh D, Solanki Y, Mishra AK, Mondal A (2013) Utility of intrastriatal ratios of FDOPA to differentiate idiopathic Parkinson’s disease from atypical parkinsonian disorders. Nucl Med Commun 34:426–431CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Gallagher CL, Bell B, Palotti M, Oh J, Christian BT, Okonkwo O, Sojkova J, Buyan-Dent L, Nickles RJ, Harding SJ, Stone CK, Johnson SC, Holden JE (2015) Anterior cingulate dopamine turnover and behavior change in Parkinson’s disease. Brain Imaging Behav 9:821–827CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 19.Li CT, Palotti M, Holden JE, Oh J, Okonkwo O, Christian BT, Bendlin BB, Buyan-Dent L, Harding SJ, Stone CK, DeJesus OT, Nickles RJ, Gallagher CL (2014) A dual-tracer study of extrastriatal 6-[18F]fluoro-m-tyrosine and 6-[18F]-fluoro-L-dopa uptake in Parkinson’s disease. Synapse 68:325–331CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 23.García-Gómez FJ, García-Solís D, Luis-Simón FJ, Marín-Oyaga VA, Carrillo F, Mir P, Vázquez-Albertino RJ (2013) Elaboration of the SPM template for the standardization of SPECT images with 123I-Ioflupane. Rev Esp Med Nucl E Imagen Mol 32:350–356Google Scholar
- 32.Madsen SK, Ho AJ, Hua X, Saharan PS, Toga AW, Jack CR Jr, Weiner MW, Thompson PM, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (2010) 3D maps localize caudate nucleus atrophy in 400 Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy elderly subjects. Neurobiol Aging 31:1312–1325CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 36.Varrone A, Dickson JC, Tossici-Bolt L, Sera T, Asenbaum S, Booij J, Kapucu OL, Kluge A, Knudsen GM, Koulibaly PM, Nobili F, Pagani M, Sabri O, Vander Borght T, van Laere K, Tatsch K (2013) European multicentre database of healthy controls for [123I]FP-CIT SPECT (ENC-DAT): age-related effects, gender differences and evaluation of different methods of analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 40:213–227CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar