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 101–125 of 148 studies in Biomarkers published 2019 (page 5 of 6) · 31,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 148 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 “Biomarkers” covers

Biomarkers — Measurable signals in blood, brain scans or spinal fluid that can indicate Alzheimer's changes.

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.

Alzheimer's disease (AD), a progressive neurodegenerative disease characterized by impairments of cognitive function as a result of synaptic deficits and neuronal loss, is associated with inflammation. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Intramembrane proteolysis of transmembrane substrates by the presenilin-γ-secretase complex is preceded and regulated by shedding of the substrate's ectodomain by α- or β-secretase. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Therapeutic Inhibition of the Complement System in Diseases of the Central Nervous System

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Frontiers in immunology 2019-03-04

The complement system plays critical roles in development, homeostasis, and regeneration in the central nervous system (CNS) throughout life; however, complement dysregulation in the CNS can lead to damage and disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The overlapping symptoms of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) and primary psychiatric disorders (such as depressive disorder, schizophrenia spectrum, and bipolar disorder) present a challenge for the differential diagnosis of bvFTD in middle and older-aged people. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

An Update on Blood-Based Markers of Alzheimer's Disease Using the SiMoA Platform

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Neurology and therapy 2019-12-12

The development of blood-based biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology as tools for screening the general population, and as the first step in a multistep process to determine which non-demented individuals are at greatest risk of developing AD dementia, is essential. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

CSF neurofilament contributes to a panel of CSF α-synuclein species in differentiating PD patients from healthy controls. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

MpHE efficiently reduced astrogliosis, the presence of insoluble Aβ peptides in the hippocampus and spatial learning impairments, of both, lean, and obese 5XFAD mice. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Redistribution of the water channel aquaporin-4 (AQP4) away from astrocyte endfeet and into parenchymal processes is a striking histological feature in mouse models of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other neurological conditions with prominent astrogliosis. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Our results suggest that the mechanism underlying low CSF Aβ levels differs between amyloid PET(-) iNPH and amyloid PET(+) AD subjects. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Cognitive deficits exhibited by FAD rats were not exacerbated by the introduction of the SHRSP phenotype, nor was the hyperactivity phenotype associated with SHRSP altered by the FAD transgene. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Significant differences between platelet characteristics from AD patients and HC at the time of first clinical diagnosis were observed. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Given the importance of early diagnosis of AD patients, it was suggested that the measurement of plasma levels and also mRNA expression of BACE1 might be a valuable blood-based biomarker used in preference to other invasive diagnostic methods such as cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

In the present study, a novel mutation in the presenilin 1 gene was discovered in an Iraq-native patient with early-onset Alzheimer's disease, who presented with speech impairment and memory decline at age 46 years. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by the formation of extracellular amyloid plaques containing the amyloid β-protein (Aβ) within the parenchyma of the brain. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Cleavage of the amyloid precursor protein's (APP) transmembrane domain (TMD) by γ-secretase is a crucial step in the aetiology of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

↑ 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
  • Randomized / 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
  • Multicenter 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 31,780 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 31,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66% of the library) and OpenAlex (16%), 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.

1,052 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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    Where this research is being discussed: events