103
|
Buijink AWG, van der Stouwe AMM, Broersma M, Sharifi S, Groot PFC, Speelman JD, Maurits NM, van Rootselaar AF. Motor network disruption in essential tremor: a functional and effective connectivity study. Brain 2015; 138:2934-47. [PMID: 26248468 DOI: 10.1093/brain/awv225] [Citation(s) in RCA: 105] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2015] [Accepted: 06/19/2015] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Although involvement of the cerebello-thalamo-cortical network has often been suggested in essential tremor, the source of oscillatory activity remains largely unknown. To elucidate mechanisms of tremor generation, it is of crucial importance to study the dynamics within the cerebello-thalamo-cortical network. Using a combination of electromyography and functional magnetic resonance imaging, it is possible to record the peripheral manifestation of tremor simultaneously with brain activity related to tremor generation. Our first aim was to study the intrinsic activity of regions within the cerebello-thalamo-cortical network using dynamic causal modelling to estimate effective connectivity driven by the concurrently recorded tremor signal. Our second aim was to objectify how the functional integrity of the cerebello-thalamo-cortical network is affected in essential tremor. We investigated the functional connectivity between cerebellar and cortical motor regions showing activations during a motor task. Twenty-two essential tremor patients and 22 healthy controls were analysed. For the effective connectivity analysis, a network of tremor-signal related regions was constructed, consisting of the left primary motor cortex, premotor cortex, supplementary motor area, left thalamus, and right cerebellar motor regions lobule V and lobule VIII. A measure of variation in tremor severity over time, derived from the electromyogram, was included as modulatory input on intrinsic connections and on the extrinsic cerebello-thalamic connections, giving a total of 128 models. Bayesian model selection and random effects Bayesian model averaging were used. Separate seed-based functional connectivity analyses for the left primary motor cortex, left supplementary motor area and right cerebellar lobules IV, V, VI and VIII were performed. We report two novel findings that support an important role for the cerebellar system in the pathophysiology of essential tremor. First, in the effective connectivity analysis, tremor variation during the motor task has an excitatory effect on both the extrinsic connection from cerebellar lobule V to the thalamus, and the intrinsic activity of cerebellar lobule V and thalamus. Second, the functional integrity of the motor network is affected in essential tremor, with a decrease in functional connectivity between cortical and cerebellar motor regions. This decrease in functional connectivity, related to the motor task, correlates with an increase in clinical tremor severity. Interestingly, increased functional connectivity between right cerebellar lobules I-IV and the left thalamus correlates with an increase in clinical tremor severity. In conclusion, our findings suggest that cerebello-dentato-thalamic activity and cerebello-cortical connectivity is disturbed in essential tremor, supporting previous evidence of functional cerebellar changes in essential tremor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arthur W G Buijink
- 1 Department of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2 Brain Imaging Center, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A M Madelein van der Stouwe
- 3 Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands 4 Neuroimaging Center, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Marja Broersma
- 3 Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands 4 Neuroimaging Center, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Sarvi Sharifi
- 1 Department of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2 Brain Imaging Center, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Paul F C Groot
- 2 Brain Imaging Center, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 5 Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes D Speelman
- 1 Department of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Natasha M Maurits
- 3 Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands 4 Neuroimaging Center, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Anne-Fleur van Rootselaar
- 1 Department of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2 Brain Imaging Center, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
104
|
Lamberts LE, Williams SP, Terwisscha van Scheltinga AG, Lub-de Hooge MN, Schröder CP, Gietema JA, Brouwers AH, de Vries EG. Antibody Positron Emission Tomography Imaging in Anticancer Drug Development. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33:1491-504. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2014.57.8278] [Citation(s) in RCA: 84] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
More than 50 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), including several antibody–drug conjugates, are in advanced clinical development, forming an important part of the many molecularly targeted anticancer therapeutics currently in development. Drug development is a relatively slow and expensive process, limiting the number of drugs that can be brought into late-stage trials. Development decisions could benefit from quantitative biomarkers, enabling visualization of the tissue distribution of (potentially modified) therapeutic mAbs to confirm effective whole-body target expression, engagement, and modulation and to evaluate heterogeneity across lesions and patients. Such biomarkers may be realized with positron emission tomography imaging of radioactively labeled antibodies, a process called immunoPET. This approach could potentially increase the power and value of early trials by improving patient selection, optimizing dose and schedule, and rationalizing observed drug responses. In this review, we summarize the available literature and the status of clinical trials regarding the potential of immunoPET during early anticancer drug development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laetitia E. Lamberts
- Laetitia E. Lamberts, Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge, Carolien P. Schröder, Jourik A. Gietema, Adrienne H. Brouwers, and Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Simon P. Williams, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
| | - Simon P. Williams
- Laetitia E. Lamberts, Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge, Carolien P. Schröder, Jourik A. Gietema, Adrienne H. Brouwers, and Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Simon P. Williams, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
| | - Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga
- Laetitia E. Lamberts, Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge, Carolien P. Schröder, Jourik A. Gietema, Adrienne H. Brouwers, and Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Simon P. Williams, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
| | - Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge
- Laetitia E. Lamberts, Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge, Carolien P. Schröder, Jourik A. Gietema, Adrienne H. Brouwers, and Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Simon P. Williams, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
| | - Carolien P. Schröder
- Laetitia E. Lamberts, Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge, Carolien P. Schröder, Jourik A. Gietema, Adrienne H. Brouwers, and Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Simon P. Williams, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
| | - Jourik A. Gietema
- Laetitia E. Lamberts, Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge, Carolien P. Schröder, Jourik A. Gietema, Adrienne H. Brouwers, and Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Simon P. Williams, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
| | - Adrienne H. Brouwers
- Laetitia E. Lamberts, Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge, Carolien P. Schröder, Jourik A. Gietema, Adrienne H. Brouwers, and Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Simon P. Williams, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
| | - Elisabeth G.E. de Vries
- Laetitia E. Lamberts, Anton G.T. Terwisscha van Scheltinga, Marjolijn N. Lub-de Hooge, Carolien P. Schröder, Jourik A. Gietema, Adrienne H. Brouwers, and Elisabeth G.E. de Vries, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Simon P. Williams, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA
| |
Collapse
|