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 135 studies in Biomarkers published 2020 (page 5 of 6) · 32,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 135 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 is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder, with the strongest disease-associated changes observed at clinical or end-stage disease. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Blood-isolated BEVs have emerged as a novel player in the study of AD, with enormous potential as a diagnostic, evaluation of therapeutics, and treatment tool. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Mass spectrometry (MS)-based protein identification via MALDI ToF/ToF showed that fibrinogen-β-chain (spot 64) and fibrinogen-γ-chain (spot 91) with differential expression ratio >1.5 were significantly upregulated (p < 0.05) in AD patients when compared to non-AD individuals. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

This study evaluated the neuroprotective and neuroimmunomodulatory potential of apigenin using in vitro models of neuroinflammation associated with AD. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

FTS•B effectively counteracted cognitive decline by regulating neuroinflammation via NF-κB signaling in APP/PS1 mice, providing preliminary experimental evidence that FTS•B is a promising therapeutic agent in AD treatment. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

These findings provide further evidence for the roles of hypothalamic and metabolic dysfunction in AD, which in the 3xTg-AD mouse model appears to be dependent on both sex and diet. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

To evaluate whether the polygenic profile modifies the development of sporadic Alzheimer's disease (sAD) and pathological biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), 462 sAD patients and 463 age-matched cognitively normal (CN) controls were genotyped for 35 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that are significantly associated with sAD. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Neuropathological investigations report that in synucleinopathies with dementia, namely Parkinson's disease (PD) with dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), the histopathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's Disease (AD), in particular amyloid plaques, are frequently observed. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's Disease Diagnosis Using Misfolding Proteins in Blood

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Dementia and neurocognitive disorders 2020-03-06

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is pathologically characterized by a long progressive phase of neuronal changes, including accumulation of extracellular amyloid-β (Aβ) and intracellular neurofibrillary tangles, before the onset of observable symptoms. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The present findings suggest that amyloid-independent regional neurodegeneration might underlie relations of neuroticism and conscientiousness with AD. 4 key findings →

Participants: 397 Evidence: low

The combination of the scaffolds of the cholinesterase inhibitor huprine Y and the antioxidant capsaicin results in compounds with nanomolar potencies toward human acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and butyrylcholinesterase (BChE) that retain or improve the antioxidant properties of capsaicin. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Advances in the development of three-dimensional (3D) brain organoids maintained in vitro have provided excellent opportunities to study brain development and neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Cryo-temperature effects on membrane protein structure and dynamics

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP 2020-03-11

Innovations in cryogenic electron microscopy (Cryo-EM) have led to high-quality structures of important proteins such as the ribosome and γ-secretase, the membrane protease that produces Aβ involved in Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Regional binding of tau and amyloid PET tracers in Down syndrome autopsy brain tissue

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Molecular neurodegeneration 2020-11-23

This study provides new insights into the regional binding distribution of a first-generation and a second-generation Tau tracer in limbic and neocortical regions in adults with DS, as well as regional differences in Tau binding in adult with DS vs. those with 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 32,180 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 32,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66.5% of the library) and OpenAlex (15.8%), 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.

1,045 records (3.2% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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

Last updated