Advertisement

Kinetic Modeling of Radiotracers

  • Mark LubberinkEmail author
  • Kerstin Heurling
Chapter

Abstract

Positron emission tomography (PET) is a powerful tool for the noninvasive measurement of biological parameters. Because of its inherently quantitative nature, PET can be used to measure radioactivity concentrations in the blood and various tissues over time. Using the proper tracer and tracer kinetic model, this information can be used to determine parameters such as blood flow, receptor availability, and substrate metabolism. In this chapter, we will first discuss the basic concept of quantitative PET measurements. Then, we will describe compartment models for blood flow, irreversible kinetics, and receptor-ligand kinetics in more detail. The use of these compartment models for the computation of voxel-wise maps of functional parameters requires the linearization of the compartment models, which is addressed in the context of both irreversible and reversible models. Finally, further simplifications that do not require dynamic scanning are briefly described. Although this chapter is by no means exhaustive, it aims to provide an introduction to the use of tracer kinetic models to derive functional parameters from PET data.

Keywords

PET Tracer kinetic analysis Standardized uptake value Patlak Logan Basis function method Receptor kinetics Blood flow Compartment models 

References

  1. 1.
    Lammertsma AA. Forward to the Past: The case for quantitative PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 2017;58(7):1019–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jonasson M, Wall A, Chiotis K, Saint-Aubert L, Wilking H, Sprycha M, et al. Tracer kinetic analysis of (S)-18F-THK5117 as a PET tracer for assessing tau pathology. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kety SS. The theory and applications of the exchange of inert gas at the lungs and tissues. Pharmacol Rev. 1951;3(1):1–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kety SS, Schmidt CF. The nitrous oxide method for the quantitative determination of cerebral blood flow in man: theory, procedure and normal values. J Clin Invest. 1948;27(4):476–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lammertsma AA, Bench CJ, Hume SP, Osman S, Gunn K, Brooks DJ, et al. Comparison of methods for analysis of clinical [C-11]raclopride studies. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1996;16(1):42–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lammertsma AA, Hume SP. Simplified reference tissue model for PET receptor studies. NeuroImage. 1996;4(3Pt 1):153–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wu Y, Carson RE. Noise reduction in the simplified reference tissue model for neuroreceptor functional imaging. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2002;22(12):1440–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gjedde A. High- and low-affinity transport of D-glucose from blood to brain. J Neurochem. 1981;36(4):1463–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Patlak CS, Blasberg RG, Fenstermacher JD. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1983;3(1):1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Logan J, Fowler JS, Volkow ND, Wolf AP, Dewey SL, Schlyer DJ, et al. Graphical analysis of reversible radioligand binding from time-activity measurements applied to [N- 11 C-methyl]-(−)-cocaine PET studies in human subjects. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1990;10(5):740–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Logan J, Fowler JS, Volkow ND, Wang GJ, Ding YS, Alexoff DL. Distribution volume ratios without blood sampling from graphical analysis of PET data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1996;16(5):834–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Watabe H, Jino H, Kawachi N, Teramoto N, Hayashi T, Ohta Y, et al. Parametric imaging of myocardial blood flow with 15O-water and PET using the basis function method. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(7):1219–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boellaard R, Knaapen P, Rijbroek A, Luurtsema GJ, Lammertsma AA. Evaluation of basis function and linear least squares methods for generating parametric blood flow images using 15O-water and positron emission tomography. Mol Imaging Biol. 2005;7(4):273–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gunn RN, Lammertsma AA, Hume SP, Cunningham VJ. Parametric imaging of ligand-receptor binding in PET using a simplified reference region model. NeuroImage. 1997;6(4):279–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoekstra CJ, Hoekstra OS, Stroobants SG, Vansteenkiste J, Nuyts J, Smit EF, et al. Methods to monitor response to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer with 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2002;43(10):1304–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgical Sciences – Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Uppsala University and Medical PhysicsUppsala University HospitalUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Wallenberg Centre for Molecular and Translational Medicine and the Institute of Neuroscience and PhysiologyUniversity of GothenburgGotenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations