SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Identifying a glucose metabolic brain pattern in an adeno-associated viral vector based rat model for Parkinson's disease using <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET imaging.

Sci Rep · 2019-08-26

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-48713-0PMID: 31451742

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

We investigated the glucose metabolism in an adeno-associated viral vector based alpha-synuclein rat model for Parkinson's disease (PD) using longitudinal 18F-FDG PET imaging, which resulted in an improved characterization of this animal model. We generated a PD specific pattern (PDSP) based on a multivariate classification approach to differentiate between a PD and control group at a late disease stage, where the neurodegeneration is considered nearly complete. In particular, we applied a principal component analysis prior to classification by a support vector machine (SVM). Moreover, by using a SVM for regression to predict corresponding motor scores, a PD motor pattern (PDMP) was derived as well. The PDSP mainly corresponds to the PDMP and overlaps to a large extent with the human pattern. We were able to quantify disease expression at previous time points by projecting onto the PDSP and PDMP. While a univariate analysis indicated metabolic changes which did not persist through time, both PDSP and PDMP were able to differentiate significantly (p-value < 0.05) between the PD and control group at week 4, 6 and 9 post injection, while no significant differences were obtained at baseline and at week 3, which is in accordance with the animal model.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.