Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 268

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Graphical, Kinetic, and Equilibrium Analyses of in vivo [123I]β-CIT Binding to Dopamine Transporters in Healthy Human Subjects

Open access
Laruelle, Marc, Wallace, Elizabeth, Seibyl, John P., Baldwin, Ronald M., Zea-Ponce, Yolanda, Zoghbi, Sami S., Neumeyer, John L., Charney, Dennis S., Hoffer, Paul B., Innis, Robert B.·1994·Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism

Abstract

The in vivo kinetics of the dopamine (DA) transporter probe 123 I-labeled 2β-carboxymethoxy-3β-(4-iodophenyl)tropane ([123 I]β-CIT) in striatum was investigated with single-photon emission computerized tomography (SPECT) in five healthy human subjects. The aim of this study was to derive an adequate measure of the DA transporter density that would not be affected by regional cerebral blood flow or peripheral clearance of the tracer. SPECT data were acquired on the day of injection (day 1) from 0 to 7 h and on the following day (day 2) from 19 to 25 h. Arterial sampling on day 1 was used to measure the input function. Graphical, kinetic, and equilibrium analyses were evaluated. Graphical analysis of day 1 data, with the assumption of negligible dissociation of the tracer–receptor complex ( k 4= 0), was found to be blood flow-dependent. A three-compartment kinetic analysis of day 1 data were performed using a three ( k 4= 0)- and a four ( k 4> 0)-parameter model. The three-parameter model estimated the k on B max product at 0.886 ± 0.087 min−1. The four-parameter model gave a binding potential (BP) of 476 ml g−1, a value consistent with in vitro measurements. The stability of the regional uptake on day 2 allowed direct measurement of the specific to nonspecific equilibrium partition coefficient (V 3″ = k 3/ k 4= 6.66 ± 1.54). Results of day 1 kinetic analysis and day 2 equilibrium analysis were well correlated among subjects. Simulations indicated that the error associated with the day 2 equilibrium analysis was acceptable for plasma tracer terminal half-lives >10 h. We propose the equilibrium analysis on day 2 as the method of choice for clinical studies since it does not require multiple scans or the measurement of the arterial plasma tracer concentrations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/jcbfm.1994.131

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 268

Metadata

Authors
Laruelle, M., Wallace, E., Seibyl, J. P., Baldwin, R. M., Zea-Ponce, Y., Zoghbi, S. S., Neumeyer, J. L., Charney, D. S., Hoffer, P. B., & Innis, R. B.
Venue
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
Published
1994-11
Volume
14
Issue
6
Pages
982-994
ISSN
  • 0271-678X (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-7016
OpenAlex
W2055779291
Cited by
268
References
1
FWCI
11.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Graphical, Kinetic, and Equilibrium Analyses of in vivo [123I]β-CIT Binding to Dopamine Transporters in Healthy Human Subjects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/jcbfm.1994.131
The paper
Laruelle, M., Wallace, E., Seibyl, J. P., Baldwin, R. M., Zea-Ponce, Y., Zoghbi, S. S., Neumeyer, J. L., Charney, D. S., Hoffer, P. B., & Innis, R. B. (1994). Graphical, Kinetic, and Equilibrium Analyses of in vivo [123I]β-CIT Binding to Dopamine Transporters in Healthy Human Subjects. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism. https://doi.org/10.1038/jcbfm.1994.131

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.