Cited by 28Medical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms

Positron-emission tomography molecular imaging of glia and myelin in drug discovery for multiple sclerosis

Matthews, Paul M, Datta, Gourab·2015·Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery

Abstract

Introduction Therapies acting on glial cells are being explored for new drug development for multiple sclerosis. Molecular imaging using positron-emission tomography (PET) could address relevant questions in early phase clinical trials. Areas covered In this article, the authors critically review human PET methods that can be applied in specialised centres for imaging activated microglia and astrocytes and myelin. Expert opinion Strengths of PET lie in the molecular selectivity, sensitivity and potential for absolute quantitation. Even now, translocator protein PET radioligands could be used in exploratory studies for interventions targeting brain microglial activation. The clinical and neuropathological meaningfulness of signal from PET radioligands reporting on astrocyte activation through cellular expression of either monoamine oxidase B or the I2-imidazoline receptor or metabolism of [(11)C]acetate can now explored. [(11)C] N-methyl-4,4'-diaminostilbene, a PET marker for myelin, could soon enter first human trials. However, use of any of these PET glial markers demands a well-focused hypothesis and a commitment to validation in the context of use. Enhanced access to these radioligands, standardisation of analyses and lowering the costs of using them are needed if their full promise is to be realised.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1517/17460441.2015.1032240

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Matthews, P. M., & Datta, G.
Affiliations
Imperial College London (GB)
Venue
Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery
Published
2015-04-05
Volume
10
Issue
5
Pages
557-570
ISSN
  • 1746-0441 (ISSN-L)
  • 1746-045X
OpenAlex
W2168391482
Cited by
28
References
86
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3
FWCI
0.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • GlaxoSmithKline
  • Wellcome Trust
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0514-10022)
  • Imperial College London
  • Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K501013/1)
  • NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, positron emission tomography, microglial activation, astrocyte activation, myelin imaging, monoamine oxidase B, 11C-acetate, drug discovery
MeSH terms
Animals, Astrocytes, Humans, Multiple Sclerosis, Myelin Sheath, Neuroglia, Drug Design, Microglia, Positron-Emission Tomography, Drug Discovery, Molecular Imaging

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