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 31 studies in Biomarkers published 2009 (page 1 of 2) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 31 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.

Cerebrospinal fluid biomarker signature in Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative subjects

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100. Annals of Neurology 2009-03-19

CSF A beta(1-42) was the most sensitive biomarker for AD in the autopsy cohort of CSF samples: receiver operating characteristic area under the curve of 0.913 and sensitivity for AD detection of 96.4%. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Serum Abeta40/42 ratio was significantly higher in MDD patients than in controls, and this difference was seen for both elderly and young subjects. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 60 Evidence: moderate

A highly robust assay for repeatedly measuring Abeta forms in plasma such as INNO-BIA plasma Abeta forms might be a useful tool in a future risk assessment of AD. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

In a population-based sample, increasing gliosis precedes development of Alzheimer lesions. 3 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

The use of frozen rather than fresh samples renders higher diagnostic accuracy within a multicentre context. 2 key findings →

Participants: 49 Evidence: low

The human GFAP splice variants GFAPDelta164 and GFAPDeltaexon6 both result in a GFAP protein isoform with a unique out-of-frame carboxy-terminus that can be detected by the GFAP+1 antibody. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) refers to the specific deposition of amyloid fibrils in the leptomeningeal and cerebral blood vessel walls, often causing secondary vascular degenerative changes. 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

Total and phosphorylated tau protein as biological markers of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Experimental gerontology 2009-10-22

Advances in our understanding of tau-mediated neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are moving this disease pathway to center stage for the development of biomarkers and disease modifying drug discovery efforts. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Homocysteine metabolism and cerebrospinal fluid markers for Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2009-01-01

Disturbed homocysteine metabolism is a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and may contribute to the disease pathophysiology by increasing both amyloid-beta (Abeta) production and phosphorylated tau (P-tau) accumulation. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease associated with senile beta-amyloid (Abeta) plaques and cognitive decline. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia, comprising 60-80% of all reported cases, and currently affects 5.2 million Americans. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

The association of increased CSF-NFL levels with increasing severity of WMLs in non-demented subjects suggests that NFL is a marker for axonal damage in response to small vessel disease in the brain. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and protein S-100B are established indicators of astrogliosis in neuropathology. 2 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
  • 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