Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds
Reply

Reply:

S.A. Sajjadi and P.J. Nestor
American Journal of Neuroradiology September 2017, 38 (9) E64; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5261
S.A. Sajjadi
aDepartment of Neurology University of California, Irvine Irvine, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for S.A. Sajjadi
P.J. Nestor
bGerman Center for Neurodegenerative diseases Magdeburg, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for P.J. Nestor
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

We thank Dr Matias-Guiu et al for their interest in our study on the role of MR imaging in the syndromic classification of primary progressive aphasia (PPA).1 Their proposal that FDG-PET might be a more sensitive method than structural MR imaging is highly plausible. We also agree with Matias-Guiu et al that direct comparison would be necessary to definitively resolve the issue. For instance, both structural MR imaging and FDG-PET measure neurodegeneration. The greater the degree of neurodegeneration, therefore, the more likely it is to be detectable with these types of imaging. In other words, the sensitivity of any technique that operates through detecting degeneration is also a function of disease severity. To this end, it is possibly relevant that their PPA group as a whole was more advanced than those with PPA in our series—mean Mini-Mental State Examination and Addenbrookes cognitive examination scores of 18.5 ± 8.1 and 46.1 ± 22.0,2 respectively, compared with scores of 22.1 ± 3.9 and 56.4 ± 14.1.1 Whether this confounder offers a credible explanation for the apparent increased sensitivity of FDG-PET of Matias-Guiu et al is perhaps debatable, but nonetheless important to address with a direct comparison.

A further methodologic feature that we would strongly advocate in designing a future study is the inclusion of a good number of negative (healthy age-matched) and positive (non-PPA degenerative dementia) controls. If raters know a priori that the scans they are evaluating come from a few predefined groups, the rating essentially becomes a forced-choice paradigm; this, in turn, may artificially inflate the accuracy compared with a real-world clinical environment in which the differential diagnosis is more open-ended.

Finally, as noted by Matias-Guiu et al, a new study could also assess the potential benefit of the combination of FDG-PET and MR imaging. To this end, we would add the possibility that the decision of whether to combine them is likely to vary according to the precise clinical question. For instance, our study showed that MR imaging returns near-perfect accuracy in detecting the lesions of semantic-variant PPA, making FDG-PET redundant in this scenario. In contrast, the terrible sensitivity yet good specificity for nonfluent and logopenic PPA with MR imaging suggest that a hierarchic algorithm in which one proceeds to FDG-PET if the MR imaging is nonspecific might be sensible.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Sajjadi SA,
    2. Sheikh-Bahaei N,
    3. Cross J, et al
    . Can MRI visual assessment differentiate the variants of primary-progressive aphasia? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017 Mar 24. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5126 pmid:28341715
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Matías-Guiu JA,
    2. Cabrera-Martín MN,
    3. Pérez-Castejón MJ, et al
    . Visual and statistical analysis of 18F-FDG PET in primary progressive aphasia. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015;42:916–27 doi:10.1007/s00259-015-2994-9 pmid:25647075
    CrossRefPubMed
  • © 2017 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 38 (9)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 38, Issue 9
1 Sep 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Reply:
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Reply:
S.A. Sajjadi, P.J. Nestor
American Journal of Neuroradiology Sep 2017, 38 (9) E64; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5261

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Reply:
S.A. Sajjadi, P.J. Nestor
American Journal of Neuroradiology Sep 2017, 38 (9) E64; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5261
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • FDG-PET/CT or MRI for the Diagnosis of Primary Progressive Aphasia?
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

Similar Articles

Advertisement

News and Updates

  • Lucien Levy Best Research Article Award
  • Thanks to our 2021 Distinguished Reviewers
  • Press Releases

Resources

  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • How to Participate in a Tweet Chat
  • AJNR Podcast Archive
  • Ideas for Publicizing Your Research
  • Librarian Resources
  • Terms and Conditions

Opportunities

  • Share Your Art in Perspectives
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons
  • Moderate a Tweet Chat

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Neurographics
  • ASNR Annual Meeting
  • Fellowship Portal
  • Position Statements

© 2022 by the American Society of Neuroradiology | Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire