NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundClinical estimates of brain iron concentration are achievable with quantitative transverse relaxation rate R2, via time-consuming multiple spin-echo (SE) sequences. The objective of this study was to investigate whether quantitative iron-sensitive information may be derived from 3.0 T dual-contrast fast-spin-echo (FSE) sequences (typically employed in anatomical non-quantitative evaluations), as a routinely-collected alternative to evaluate iron levels in healthy (HC) and Parkinson's disease (PD) brains.New methodMRI 3.0 T FSE data from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) (12 PD, 12 age- and gender-matched HC subjects) were cross-sectionally and longitudinally evaluated. A new measure, 'effective R2', was calculated for bilateral subcortical grey matter (caudate nucleus, putamen, globus pallidus, red nucleus, substantia nigra). Linear regression analysis was performed to correlate 'effective R2' with models of age-dependent brain iron concentration and striatal dopamine transporter (DaT) receptor binding ratio.ResultsEffective R2 was strongly correlated with estimated brain iron concentration. In PD, putaminal effective R2 difference was observed between the hemispheres contra-/ipsi-lateral to the predominantly symptomatic side at onset. This hemispheric difference was correlated with the putaminal DaT binding ratios in PD.Comparison with existing method(s)Effective R2, derived from rapid dual-contrast FSE sequences, showed viability as an alternative to R2 from SE sequences. Linear correlation of effective R2 with estimated iron concentration was comparable to documented iron-dependent R2. The effective R2 correlation coefficient was consistent with theoretical R2 iron-dependence at 3.0 T.ConclusionsEffective R2 has clinical potential as a fast quantitative method, as an alternative to R2, to aid evaluation of brain iron levels and DaT function.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.