Myocardial perfusion reserve compared with peripheral perfusion reserve: a [13N]ammonia PET study

13N]ammonia PET allows quantification of myocardial perfusion. The similarity between peripheral flow and myocardial perfusion is unclear. We compared perfusion flow in the myocardium with the upper limb during rest and adenosine stress [13N]ammonia PET to establish whether peripheral perfusion reserve (PPR) correlates with MPR. [13N]ammonia myocardial perfusion PET-scans of 58 patients were evaluated (27 men, 31 women, age 64 +/- A 13 years) and were divided in four subgroups: patients with coronary artery disease (CAD, n = 15), cardiac syndrome X (SX, n = 14), idiopathic dilating cardiomyopathy (DCM, n = 16), and normal controls (NC, n = 13). Peripheral limb perfusion was measured in the muscular tissue of the proximal upper limb and quantified through a 2-tissue-compartment model and the PPR was calculated (stress/rest ratio). MPR was also calculated by a 2-tissue-compartment model. The PPR results were compared with the MPR findings. Mean myocardial perfusion increased significantly in all groups as evidenced by the MPR (CAD 1.99 +/- A 0.47; SX 1.39 +/- A 0.31; DCM 1.72 +/- A 0.69; NC 2.91 +/- A 0.78). Mean peripheral perfusion also increased but not significantly and accompanied with great variations within and between groups (mean PPR: CAD 1.30 +/- A 0.79; SX 1.36 +/- A 0.71; DCM 1.60 +/- A 1.22; NC 1.27 +/- A 0.63). The mean difference between PPR and MPR for all subpopulations varied widely. No significant correlations in flow reserve were found between peripheral and myocardial microcirculatory beds in any of the groups (Total group: r = -0.07, SEE = 0.70, CAD: r = 0.14, SEE = 0.48, SX: r = 0.17, SEE = 0.30, DCM: r = -0.11, SEE = 0.71, NC: r = -0.19, SEE = 0.80). No correlations between myocardial and peripheral perfusion (reserve) were found in different patient populations in the same PET session. This suggests a functional difference between peripheral and myocardial flow in the response to intravenously administered adenosine stress

Correction to:Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Studies of Elacestrant, A Novel Oral Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader, in Healthy Post-Menopausal Women (European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics, (2020), 45, 5, (675-689), 10.1007/s13318-020-00635-3)

Authors would like to correct the errors in table 2

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Studies of Elacestrant, A Novel Oral Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader, in Healthy Post-Menopausal Women

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Advanced estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer is currently treated with endocrine therapy. Elacestrant is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective estrogen receptor degrader with complex dose-related ER agonist/antagonist activity that is being developed as a treatment option for ER+ breast cancer. METHODS: Two first-in-human phase 1 studies of elacestrant in healthy postmenopausal women (Study 001/Study 004) were conducted to determine its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile as well as its safety and maximum tolerated dose. RESULTS: In total, 140 postmenopausal subjects received at least one dose of study drug (114 received elacestrant and 26 received placebo). Single-ascending dose and multiple-ascending dose assessments showed that doses up to 1000 mg daily were safe and well tolerated, and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Oral administration of elacestrant had an absolute bioavailability of 10% and a mean half-life ranging from 27 to 47 h, reaching steady state after 5-6 days. Mean occupancy of the ER in the uterus after seven daily doses was 83% for 200 mg and 92% for 500 mg daily. The median ratio of elacestrant concentrations in the cerebral spinal fluid vs. plasma was 0.126% (500 mg dose) and 0.205% (200 mg dose). Most adverse events were related to the upper gastrointestinal tract. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that elacestrant has good bioavailability when administered orally with a half-life that supports once-daily administration. Engagement of the ER and some ability to cross the blood-brain barrier was demonstrated in addition to an acceptable safety profile

Long axial field of view PET scanners: a road map to implementation and new possibilities

In this contribution, several opportunities and challenges for long axial field of view (LAFOV) PET are described. It is an anthology in which the main issues have been highlighted. A consolidated overview of the camera system implementation, business and financial plan, opportunities and challenges is provided. What the nuclear medicine and molecular imaging community can expect from these new PET/CT scanners is the delivery of more comprehensive information to the clinicians for advancing diagnosis, therapy evaluation and clinical research

Consensus document for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections: a joint paper by the EANM, EBJIS, and ESR (with ESCMID endorsement).

For the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection, real evidence-based guidelines to aid clinicians in choosing the most accurate diagnostic strategy are lacking. To address this need, we performed a multidisciplinary systematic review of relevant nuclear medicine, radiological, orthopaedic, infectious, and microbiological literature to define the diagnostic accuracy of each diagnostic technique and to address and provide evidence-based answers on uniform statements for each topic that was found to be important to develop a commonly agreed upon diagnostic flowchart. The approach used to prepare this set of multidisciplinary guidelines was to define statements of interest and follow the procedure indicated by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (OCEBM)

Consensus document for the diagnosis of peripheral bone infection in adults: a joint paper by the EANM, EBJIS, and ESR (with ESCMID endorsement).

In adults with a suspicion of peripheral bone infection, evidence-based guidelines in choosing the most accurate diagnostic strategy are lacking. To provide an evidence-based, multidisciplinary consensus document on the diagnostic management of adult patients with PBIs, we performed a systematic review of relevant infectious, microbiological, orthopedic, radiological, and nuclear medicine literature. Delegates from four European societies (European Bone and Joint Infection Society, European Society of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, European Society or Radiology, and European Association of Nuclear Medicine) defined clinical questions to be addressed, thoroughly reviewed the literature pertinent to each of the questions, and thereby evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of each diagnostic technique. Inclusion of the papers per statement was based on a PICO (Population/problem - Intervention/indicator - Comparator - Outcome) question following the strategy reported by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine. For each statement, the level of evidence was graded according to the 2011 review of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine. All approved statements were addressed taking into consideration the available diagnostic procedures, patient acceptance, tolerability, complications, and costs in Europe. Finally, a commonly agreed-upon diagnostic flowchart was developed

ASNC/AHA/ASE/EANM/HFSA/ISA/SCMR/SNMMI Expert Consensus Recommendations for Multimodality Imaging in Cardiac Amyloidosis: Part 1 of 2—Evidence Base and Standardized Methods of Imaging

Cardiac amyloidosis is a form of restrictive infiltrative cardiomyopathy that confers significant mortality. Because of the relative rarity of cardiac amyloidosis, clinical and diagnostic expertise in the recognition and evaluation of individuals with suspected amyloidosis is mostly limited to a few expert centers. Electrocardiography, echocardiography, and radionuclide imaging have been used for the evaluation of cardiac amyloidosis for over 40 years.1, 2, 3 Although cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has also been in clinical practice for several decades, it was not applied to cardiac amyloidosis until the late 1990s. Despite an abundance of diagnostic imaging options, cardiac amyloidosis remains largely underrecognized or delayed in diagnosis.4 Although advanced imaging options for noninvasive evaluation have substantially expanded, the evidence is predominately confined to single-center small studies or limited multicenter larger experiences, and there continues to be no clear consensus on standardized imaging pathways in cardiac amyloidosis. This lack of guidance is particularly problematic given that there are numerous emerging therapeutic options for this morbid disease, increasing the importance of accurate recognition at earlier stages. Imaging provides noninvasive tools for follow-up of disease remission/progression complementing clinical evaluation. Additional areas not defined include appropriate clinical indications for imaging, optimal imaging utilization by clinical presentation, accepted imaging methods, accurate image interpretation, and comprehensive and clear reporting. Prospective randomized clinical trial data for the diagnosis of amyloidosis and for imaging-based strategies for treatment are not available. A consensus of expert opinion is greatly needed to guide the appropriate clinical utilization of imaging in cardiac amyloidosis

ASNC/AHA/ASE/EANM/HFSA/ISA/SCMR/SNMMI expert consensus recommendations for multimodality imaging in cardiac amyloidosis: Part 1 of 2—evidence base and standardized methods of imaging

Cardiac amyloidosis is a form of restrictive infiltrative cardiomyopathy that confers significant mortality. Due to the relative rarity of cardiac amyloidosis, clinical and diagnostic expertise in the recognition and evaluation of individuals with suspected amyloidosis is mostly limited to a few expert centers. Electrocardiography, echocardiography, and radionuclide imaging have been used for the evaluation of cardiac amyloidosis for over 40 years.1-3 Although cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has also been in clinical practice for several decades, it was not applied to cardiac amyloidosis until the late 1990s. Despite an abundance of diagnostic imaging options, cardiac amyloidosis remains largely underrecognized or delayed in diagnosis.4 While advanced imaging options for noninvasive evaluation have substantially expanded, the evidence is predominately confined to single-center small studies or limited multicenter larger experiences, and there continues to be no clear consensus on standardized imaging pathways in cardiac amyloidosis. This lack of guidance is particularly problematic given that there are numerous emerging therapeutic options for this morbid disease, increasing the importance of accurate recognition at earlier stages. Imaging provides non-invasive tools for follow-up of disease remission/progression complementing clinical evaluation. Additional areas not defined include appropriate clinical indications for imaging, optimal imaging utilization by clinical presentation, accepted imaging methods, accurate image interpretation, and comprehensive and clear reporting. Prospective randomized clinical trial data for the diagnosis of amyloidosis and for imaging-based strategies for treatment are not available. A consensus of expert opinion is greatly needed to guide the appropriate clinical utilization of imaging in cardiac amyloidosis

ASNC/AHA/ASE/EANM/HFSA/ISA/SCMR/SNMMI Expert Consensus Recommendations for Multimodality Imaging in Cardiac Amyloidosis: Part 2 of 2—Diagnostic Criteria and Appropriate Utilization

Cardiac amyloidosis is emerging as an underdiagnosed cause of heart failure and mortality. Growing literature suggests that a noninvasive diagnosis of cardiac amyloidosis is now feasible. However, the diagnostic criteria and utilization of imaging in cardiac amyloidosis are not standardized. In this paper, Part 2 of a series, a panel of international experts from multiple societies define the diagnostic criteria for cardiac amyloidosis and appropriate utilization of echocardiography, cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging, and radionuclide imaging in the evaluation of patients with known or suspected cardiac amyloidosis