Home › Research › Biomarkers
Benchmarking of a multi-biomarker low-volume panel for Alzheimer's disease and related dementia research
Ibanez L, Liu M, Beric A, Timsina J, Kohlfeld P, Bergmann K, Lowery J, Sykora N et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2024-11-22
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Introduction In the research setting, obtaining accurate established biomarker measurements and maximizing use of the precious samples is key. Accurate technologies are available for Alzheimer's disease (AD), but no platform can measure all the established and emerging biomarkers in one run. The NUcleic acid Linked Immuno-Sandwich Assay (NULISA) is a technology that requires 15 µL of sample to measure more than 100 analytes. Methods We compared AD-relevant biomarkers included in the NULISA against validated assays in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma. Results CSF measures of amyloid beta 42/40, and phosphorylated tau (p-tau)217 are highly correlated when measured by immunoassay, mass spectrometry, or NULISA. In plasma, p-tau217 performance is similar to that reported with other technologies when predicting amyloidosis. Other biomarkers show a wide range of correlation values depending on the fluid and the platform. Discussion The NULISA multiplexed platform produces reliable results for established biomarkers in CSF that are useful in research settings, with the advantage of measuring additional biomarkers using minimal sample volume. Highlights We tested the novel technology NUcleic acid Linked Immuno-Sandwich Assay (NULISA) in the dementia research setting. NULISA multiplexed platform produces reliable results for established and emerging biomarkers using minimal sample volume. Cerebrospinal fluid measures of amyloid beta 42/40, and phosphorylated tau (p-tau)217 are highly correlated when measured by immunoassay, mass spectrometry, or NULISA. In plasma, p-tau217 performance is similar to that reported with other technologies when predicting amyloidosis. NULISA measures are useful in research settings, with the advantage of measuring additional biomarkers using minimal sample volume.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Ibanez, L., Liu, M., Beric, A., Timsina, J., Kohlfeld, P., Bergmann, K., et al. (2025). Benchmarking of a multi-biomarker low-volume panel for Alzheimer's disease and related dementia research. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14413
Vancouver
Ibanez L, Liu M, Beric A, Timsina J, Kohlfeld P, Bergmann K, et al. Benchmarking of a multi-biomarker low-volume panel for Alzheimer's disease and related dementia research. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2025. doi:10.1002/alz.14413. PMID: 39575871.
BibTeX
@article{ibanez2025-39575871,
author = {Ibanez, L. and Liu, M. and Beric, A. and Timsina, J. and Kohlfeld, P. and Bergmann, K. and Lowery, J. and Sykora, N. and others},
title = {{Benchmarking of a multi-biomarker low-volume panel for Alzheimer's disease and related dementia research}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1002/alz.14413},
pmid = {39575871},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14413}
}
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 CSF measures of amyloid beta 42/40, and phosphorylated tau (p-tau)217 are highly correlated when measured by immunoassay, mass spectrometry, or NULISA.
- Discussion The NULISA multiplexed platform produces reliable results for established biomarkers in CSF that are useful in research settings, with the advantage of measuring additional biomarkers using minimal sample volume.
- NULISA multiplexed platform produces reliable results for established and emerging biomarkers using minimal sample volume.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 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 | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 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) |
| 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 | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39575871) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 28 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100. |
| Total | 48 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “panel”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “panel”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.