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.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers

Plain-language summary

Specific biomarkers in a readily accessible biological fluid, such as blood, could aid in the identification, characterization, validation, and routine monitoring of Alzheimer's disease (AD) progression. In the current study, levels of the previously described novel cerebrospinal fluid aberrant protein complex composed of prostaglandin-D-synthase (PDS) and transthyretin (TTR) were quantified in plasma by a custom two-probe sandwich ELISA and compared to amyloid-β (Aβ)(1-42) as a standard plasma biomarker of AD. Plasma was analyzed from 140 probable AD subjects, 135 subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 74 normal control subjects (NC) prior to MCI transition, 23 diseased control (DC) subjects with either frontotemporal dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies, and 182 normal control (NC) subjects who did not progress to MCI or dementia. Levels of Aβ(1-42) were significantly elevated in NC subjects prior to MCI conversion but significantly reduced in probable AD subjects compared to NC subjects. Similarly, levels of the PDS-TTR complex were significantly reduced in both MCI and probable AD subjects compared to NC subjects. Furthermore, levels of Aβ(1-42) and the PDS-TTR complex were not significantly different in DC subjects compared to NC subjects. MMSE scores were weakly but significantly correlated with plasma levels of the PDS-TTR complex and Aβ(1-42). Trail B scores were weakly but significantly correlated with plasma levels of Aβ(1-42). Comparison of receiver operating curves shows the PDS-TTR complex is comparable to Aβ(1-42) in both MCI and probable AD subjects.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Bradley-Whitman, M. A., Abner, E., Lynn, B. C., & Lovell, M. A. (2015). A Novel Plasma Based Biomarker of Alzheimer's Disease. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-150183

Vancouver

Bradley-Whitman MA, Abner E, Lynn BC, Lovell MA. A Novel Plasma Based Biomarker of Alzheimer's Disease. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2015. doi:10.3233/jad-150183. PMID: 26401710.

BibTeX

@article{bradleywhitman2015-26401710,
  author  = {Bradley-Whitman, Melissa A and Abner, Erin and Lynn, Bert C and Lovell, Mark A},
  title   = {{A Novel Plasma Based Biomarker of Alzheimer's Disease}},
  journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
  year    = {2015},
  doi     = {10.3233/jad-150183},
  pmid    = {26401710},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-150183}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 46/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomized / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multicenter collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 26 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 46 of 100. Total 46 of 100.26 of the 56 points we could judge = 46 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 26 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 46 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2015 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 135 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded 0 / 2 No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 26401710)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 26 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 26 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 46 out of 100.
Total 46 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Biomarkers from nearby years

Also tagged “p-tau217”

692 studies in the library carry the topic tag “p-tau217”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 692 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →