Home › Research › Biomarkers
Alzheimer's disease biomarker-guided diagnostic workflow using the added value of six combined cerebrospinal fluid candidates: Aβ1-42, total-tau, phosphorylated-tau, NFL, neurogranin, and YKL-40
Hampel H, Toschi N, Baldacci F, Zetterberg H, Blennow K, Kilimann I, Teipel SJ, Cavedo E et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2018-01-09
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Introduction The diagnostic and classificatory performances of all combinations of three core (amyloid β peptide [i.e., Aβ 1-42 ], total tau [t-tau], and phosphorylated tau) and three novel (neurofilament light chain protein, neurogranin, and YKL-40) cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers of neurodegeneration were compared among individuals with mild cognitive impairment (n = 41), Alzheimer's disease dementia (ADD; n = 35), frontotemporal dementia (FTD; n = 9), and cognitively healthy controls (HC; n = 21), using 10-fold cross-validation. Methods The combinations ranking in the top 10 according to diagnostic accuracy in differentiating between distinct diagnostic categories were identified. Results The single biomarkers or biomarker combinations generating the best area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROCs) were the following: the combination [amyloid β peptide + phosphorylated tau + neurofilament light chain] for distinguishing between ADD patients and HC (AUROC = 0.86), t-tau for distinguishing between ADD and FTD patients (AUROC = 0.82), and t-tau for distinguishing between FTD patients and HC (AUROC = 0.78). Conclusions Novel and established cerebrospinal fluid markers perform with at least fair accuracy in the discrimination between ADD and FTD. The classification of mild cognitive impairment individuals was poor.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Hampel, H., Toschi, N., Baldacci, F., Zetterberg, H., Blennow, K., Kilimann, I., et al. (2018). Alzheimer's disease biomarker-guided diagnostic workflow using the added value of six combined cerebrospinal fluid candidates: Aβ1-42, total-tau, phosphorylated-tau, NFL, neurogranin, and YKL-40. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2017.11.015
Vancouver
Hampel H, Toschi N, Baldacci F, Zetterberg H, Blennow K, Kilimann I, et al. Alzheimer's disease biomarker-guided diagnostic workflow using the added value of six combined cerebrospinal fluid candidates: Aβ1-42, total-tau, phosphorylated-tau, NFL, neurogranin, and YKL-40. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2017.11.015. PMID: 29328927.
BibTeX
@article{hampel2018-29328927,
author = {Hampel, H. and Toschi, N. and Baldacci, F. and Zetterberg, H. and Blennow, K. and Kilimann, I. and Teipel, S. J. and Cavedo, E. and others},
title = {{Alzheimer's disease biomarker-guided diagnostic workflow using the added value of six combined cerebrospinal fluid candidates: Aβ1-42, total-tau, phosphorylated-tau, NFL, neurogranin, and YKL-40}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2018},
doi = {10.1016/j.jalz.2017.11.015},
pmid = {29328927},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2017.11.015}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results The single biomarkers or biomarker combinations generating the best area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROCs) were the following: the combination [amyloid β peptide + phosphorylated tau + neurofilament light chain] for distinguishing between ADD patients and HC (AUROC = 0.86), t-tau for distinguishing between ADD and FTD patients (AUROC = 0.82), and t-tau for distinguishing between FTD patients and HC (AUROC = 0.78).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants41
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 49/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / 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 and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 49 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2018 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 41 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) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation 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 |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 29328927) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 30 / 61 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 49 out of 100. |
| Total | 49 / 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.
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “sub”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “sub”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.