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.

38/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Risk genes beyond APOE

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Key recommendations emphasize that tissue biopsies remain essential for amyloidosis diagnosis and typing. Congo red staining with birefringence and fluorescence confirmation is required. Immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence are first-line subtyping tools, while mass spectrometry serves as a reference method when results remain inconclusive. Centralization of complex analyses in experienced centres is encouraged. These recommendations promote standardized, early and accurate tissue diagnosis of amyloidosis in Belgium, supporting optimal patient management and harmonization of diagnostic practices across institutions.

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

APA 7th

Dendooven, A., Vandendriessche, A., Koshy, P. J., Timmermans, F., Speeckaert, M. M., Kint, N., et al. (2026). Belgian recommendations for tissue diagnosis of amyloidosis. Acta Clinica Belgica. https://doi.org/10.1080/17843286.2026.2660739

Vancouver

Dendooven A, Vandendriessche A, Koshy PJ, Timmermans F, Speeckaert MM, Kint N, et al. Belgian recommendations for tissue diagnosis of amyloidosis. Acta Clinica Belgica. 2026. doi:10.1080/17843286.2026.2660739. PMID: 42043894.

BibTeX

@article{dendooven2026-42043894,
  author  = {Dendooven, Amélie and Vandendriessche, Annelore and Koshy, Priyanka Joseph and Timmermans, Frank and Speeckaert, Marijn M. and Kint, Nicolas and Van Aelst, Lucas N. L. and Vekemans, Marie‐Christiane and others},
  title   = {{Belgian recommendations for tissue diagnosis of amyloidosis}},
  journal = {Acta Clinica Belgica},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.1080/17843286.2026.2660739},
  pmid    = {42043894},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1080/17843286.2026.2660739}
}

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

Key recommendations emphasize that tissue biopsies remain essential for amyloidosis diagnosis and typing.
Congo red staining with birefringence and fluorescence confirmation is required.
Immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence are first-line subtyping tools, while mass spectrometry serves as a reference method when results remain inconclusive.
Centralization of complex analyses in experienced centres is encouraged.
These recommendations promote standardized, early and accurate tissue diagnosis of amyloidosis in Belgium, supporting optimal patient management and harmonization of diagnostic practices across institutions.

Why it matters

These Belgian recommendations address tissue diagnosis of amyloidosis, emphasizing that biopsies remain essential and describing staining, subtyping and centralized analysis. They concern diagnosis of amyloidosis generally and do not present a treatment, cure or prevention for Alzheimer's disease.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 38/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Acta Clinica Belgica)
Journal's citation record	0 / 4	Acta Clinica Belgica: journal h-index 52 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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	5 / 5	2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	1 / 7	Cited 2 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	1 / 5	1.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026
Impact for its field and year	3 / 6	Cited 3.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	0 / 4	Cited 2 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	3 / 4	Last-listed author Michel Delforge: h-index 56 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	KU Leuven: institution h-index 1,386 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 7 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 42043894)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	38 / 100	—

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

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

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

Related studies in Risk genes beyond APOE

Also in Risk genes beyond APOE

105 studies in the library are filed under Risk genes beyond APOE with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Risk genes beyond APOE hub.

Similar studies

More on Risk genes beyond APOE

See all studies in Risk genes beyond APOE →