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 2,151–2,175 of 2,594 studies in Biomarkers (page 87 of 104) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these 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.

An essential feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is implicated in brain energy metabolic impairment that is considered underlying pathogenesis of cognitive impairment. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Although plumbagin (5-hydroxy-2-methyl-1,4-naphthoquinone) protects against cerebral ischemia and spinal cord injury-induced oxidative stress and inflammation by activating the nuclear factor-erythroid 2-related factor-2 /antioxidant response element (Nrf2/ARE) pathway, its role in the amelioration of neurodegenerative diseases remains unexplored. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Large-scale 'omic' studies investigating the pathophysiological processes that lead to Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia have identified an increasing number of susceptibility genes, many of which are poorly characterized and have not previously been implicated in AD. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Our findings indicate that YKL-40 may contribute to decreased stability and increased permeability of BBB in AD patients. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The abnormal deposition of amyloid-β (Aβ) peptides in the brain is the main neuropathological hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Mutations in APP (amyloid precursor protein), PSEN1 (presenilin 1) or PSEN2 (presenilin 2) are the main cause of early-onset familial forms of Alzheimer's disease (autosomal dominant AD or ADAD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neuroblastoma cell lines such as SH-SY5Y are the most frequently utilized models in neurodegenerative research, and their use has advanced the understanding of the pathology of neurodegeneration over the past few decades. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

This study is the first to show an association between ACE-I use and increased plasma Aβ42 level and Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio in cognitively impaired individuals. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The aberrant metabolism of amyloid-β protein (Aβ) in the human brain has been implicated in the etiology of Alzheimer disease (AD). γ-Secretase is the enzyme that generates various forms of Aβ, such as Aβ40 and Aβ42, the latter being an aggregation-prone toxic peptide that is involved in the pathogenesis of AD. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

S100B is typically elevated in AD cases; however, the increased levels in African Americans here may be indicative of increased severity in specific populations. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Plasma NF-L is associated with progressive neurodegeneration as well as with declines in cognitive and functional measures in adults with DS. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Despite recent setbacks, disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for Alzheimer disease (AD) might become available within a few years. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Conditional double knock-out of presenilin-1 (PS1) and presenilin-2 (PS2) (PS cDKO) in forebrain of mice led to progressive memory dysfunction and forebrain degeneration. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Activation of astrocytes has been known to be associated with amyloid-beta (Abeta) deposit and production of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines that lead to neuronal cell death in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a chronic age-related neurodegenerative disease characterized by degeneration of the central cholinergic neurons, inflammation and oxidative stress in the basal forebrain, prefrontal cortex and hippocampus. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Although significant effects of interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) on glial cells are well documented, information on the expression level and localization of glial IFN-gamma receptors (IFN-gamma-R) in the human central nervous system (CNS) is sparse. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

An anti-tau monoclonal antibody tau-2 was demonstrated to react with the cells which characteristically appeared in the subcortical nuclei of certain neurodegenerative disorders. 1 key finding →

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
  • 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.

1,034 records (3.7% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 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