Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Find studies

Showing 1–25 of 49 studies in TREM2 and immune genetics · tagged Biomarkers (page 1 of 2) · 30,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 49 studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

What “TREM2 and immune genetics” covers

TREM2 and immune genetics — The TREM2 gene and related immune pathways in the brain, and what they mean for risk and treatment.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

Although recent clinical trials targeting amyloid-β in Alzheimer's disease have shown promising results, there is increasing evidence suggesting that understanding alternative disease pathways that interact with amyloid-β metabolism and amyloid pathology might be important to halt the clinical deterioration. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 75 Evidence: moderate

Neuroimaging biomarkers and CSF sTREM2 levels in Alzheimer's disease: a longitudinal study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100. Scientific reports 2024-07-03

Understanding the exact pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the involvement of triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) related microglia activation is crucial for the development of clinical trials targeting microglia activation at different stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,001 Evidence: moderate

TREM2 is a transmembrane receptor that is predominantly expressed by microglia in the central nervous system. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,027 Evidence: moderate

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that is characterized by amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulation and neuroinflammation. 4 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 21 Evidence: high

Except for αSyn, the additional biomarkers did not differentiate PD and HC, and none showed longitudinal differences, but most markers predict cognitive decline in PD during follow-up. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

TREM2 is an innate immune receptor expressed on the surface of microglia. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

Increased cerebrospinal fluid soluble TREM2 concentration in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Molecular neurodegeneration 2016-01-12

The discovery that heterozygous missense mutations in the gene encoding triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) are risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD), with only the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 gene allele conferring a higher risk, has led to increased interest in immune biology in the brain. 4 key findings →

Participants: 37 Evidence: moderate

Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) plays a critical role in microglial activation, survival, and apoptosis, as well as in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis. 4 key findings →

Participants: 3,350 Evidence: low

Neuro-inflammation was not reduced between the neflamapimod and placebo groups, and no change was observed in [18F]-DPA-714 PET. 5 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 17 Evidence: high

Reliable biomarkers of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are currently lacking. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 20 Evidence: moderate

Neuroinflammation has gained increasing attention as a potential contributing factor in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. 4 key findings →

Participants: 399 Evidence: moderate

The profile of many established and emerging CSF biomarkers of AD in a cohort of adults with DS was similar to that reported in LOAD and ADAD, while some differences were observed. 1 key finding →

Participants: 44 Evidence: moderate

Neuroinflammation is associated with Alzheimer's disease, but the application of cerebrospinal fluid measures of inflammatory proteins may be limited by overlapping pathways and relationships between them. 2 key findings →

Participants: 382 Evidence: low

CSF soluble TREM2 as a measure of immune response along the Alzheimer's disease continuum

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2018-10-25

TREM2 was suggested to be an important regulator of microglia during neurodegeneration, but previous studies report conflicting results in relation to soluble TREM2 (sTREM2) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) when using clinical criteria to classify Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 497 Evidence: moderate

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

Free full text links and the Full text may need a subscription label come from Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex records of free copies, checked 10 Oct 2026. A study with neither is unknown, not paywalled. Show only studies that are free to read

How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped

This is alzhub's own score. It is not an official metric, not an impact factor, and no journal, publisher or ranking body endorses it. We built it so that a reader who is not a scientist can tell a landmark trial from a conference abstract without having to already know the difference. Every point comes from one of 20 components, all of them printed on the study itself, so you can disagree with our arithmetic rather than having to trust the total.

  • Journal tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up to 2 pts

Journals are placed in ordered tiers, never given a numeric impact factor — we could not verify current impact factors from a source we control, and an invented one would be worse than none. Tier 1 is the top-tier general journals (NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, Nature, Science, Nature Medicine); tier 2 is the leading specialty journals; tier 3 is every other peer-reviewed journal. A separate part scores how much the journal's own papers are cited, which tells the tier-3 journals apart.

Two rules we don't bend. First, we never fill in a missing value: if a record does not state a sample size or a design, that component scores zero, and if we simply have no data for a part, such as a citation count, that part is left out and the study is scored on the parts we could check. The study card says which. Second, anything that is not a peer-reviewed article is capped at 16/100 and carries a warning chip — so a conference abstract or a company press release can never outrank a peer-reviewed paper, no matter how good it looks.

We rank a rigorous null result — a good trial showing that something does not work — above an early positive finding. Someone deciding whether to buy a supplement is served by that, and the rigour is already counted by the design and journal components.

The score is computed from the published data alone and is reproducible: the same file always yields the same numbers.

See the whole rubric drawn out → — four charts covering all 30,180 studies: how the scores are spread and where the cap bites, which of the 20 components the library is strong and weak on, which subjects rest on stronger evidence, and what kinds of study each subject is actually built from.

What this library is — and isn't

This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 30,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.9%), plus smaller pulls from PubMed, Crossref and medRxiv. If a study, a drug, or a finding isn't here, that is not evidence it doesn't exist in the literature — it may simply not have been pulled in yet.

1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 of those are preprints posted before any journal review, and the rest are conference abstracts, regulatory notices and reports. Every study card on this page states its status plainly, and the score above is capped for anything that isn't a peer-reviewed article.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed