Home › Research › Hippocampus size on brain scans
Biomarker Changes during 20 Years Preceding Alzheimer's Disease
Jia J, Ning Y, Chen M, Wang S, Yang H, Li F, Ding J, Li Y et al.. The New England journal of medicine, 2024-02-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Background Biomarker changes that occur in the period between normal cognition and the diagnosis of sporadic Alzheimer's disease have not been extensively investigated in longitudinal studies. Methods We conducted a multicenter, nested case-control study of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in cognitively normal participants who were enrolled in the China Cognition and Aging Study from January 2000 through December 2020. A subgroup of these participants underwent testing of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), cognitive assessments, and brain imaging at 2-year-to-3-year intervals. A total of 648 participants in whom Alzheimer's disease developed were matched with 648 participants who had normal cognition, and the temporal trajectories of CSF biochemical marker concentrations, cognitive testing, and imaging were analyzed in the two groups. Results The median follow-up was 19.9 years (interquartile range, 19.5 to 20.2). CSF and imaging biomarkers in the Alzheimer's disease group diverged from those in the cognitively normal group at the following estimated number of years before diagnosis: amyloid-beta (Aβ) 42 , 18 years; the ratio of Aβ 42 to Aβ 40 , 14 years; phosphorylated tau 181, 11 years; total tau, 10 years; neurofilament light chain, 9 years; hippocampal volume, 8 years; and cognitive decline, 6 years. As cognitive impairment progressed, the changes in CSF biomarker levels in the Alzheimer's disease group initially accelerated and then slowed. Conclusions In this study involving Chinese participants during the 20 years preceding clinical diagnosis of sporadic Alzheimer's disease, we observed the time courses of CSF biomarkers, the times before diagnosis at which they diverged from the biomarkers from a matched group of participants who remained cognitively normal, and the temporal order in which the biomarkers became abnormal. (Funded by the Key Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03653156.).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Jia, J., Ning, Y., Chen, M., Wang, S., Yang, H., Li, F., et al. (2024). Biomarker Changes during 20 Years Preceding Alzheimer's Disease. The New England journal of medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa2310168
Vancouver
Jia J, Ning Y, Chen M, Wang S, Yang H, Li F, et al. Biomarker Changes during 20 Years Preceding Alzheimer's Disease. The New England journal of medicine. 2024. doi:10.1056/nejmoa2310168. PMID: 38381674.
BibTeX
@article{jia2024-38381674,
author = {Jia, J. and Ning, Y. and Chen, M. and Wang, S. and Yang, H. and Li, F. and Ding, J. and Li, Y. and others},
title = {{Biomarker Changes during 20 Years Preceding Alzheimer's Disease}},
journal = {The New England journal of medicine},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1056/nejmoa2310168},
pmid = {38381674},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa2310168}
}
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 median follow-up was 19.9 years (interquartile range, 19.5 to 20.2).
- Conclusions In this study involving Chinese participants during the 20 years preceding clinical diagnosis of sporadic Alzheimer's disease, we observed the time courses of CSF biomarkers, the times before diagnosis at which they diverged from the biomarkers from a matched group of participants who remained cognitively normal, and the temporal order in which the biomarkers became abnormal.
Study details
- Study designcase-control study
- Participants648
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 69/100
Published in a top-tier journal, and it is a case-control study. Scored zero for 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 42 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 69 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 10 / 10 | Tier 1 — top-tier general journal (The New England journal of medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 6 / 12 | A case-control study |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 648 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 38381674) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 42 / 61 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 42 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 69 out of 100. |
| Total | 69 / 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 Hippocampus size on brain scans
Also in Hippocampus size on brain scans
13 studies in the library are filed under Hippocampus size on brain scans with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Hippocampus size on brain scans hub.