Home › Research › Biomarkers
Biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: current status and prospects for the future
Blennow K, Zetterberg H.. Journal of internal medicine, 2018-08-19
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Accumulating data from the clinical research support that the core Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers amyloid-β (Aβ42), total tau (T-tau), and phosphorylated tau (P-tau) reflect key elements of AD pathophysiology. Importantly, a large number of clinical studies very consistently show that these biomarkers contribute with diagnostically relevant information, also in the early disease stages. Recent technical developments have made it possible to measure these biomarkers using fully automated assays with high precision and stability. Standardization efforts have given certified reference materials for CSF Aβ42, with the aim to harmonize results between assay formats that would allow for uniform global reference limits and cut-off values. These encouraging developments have led to that the core AD CSF biomarkers have a central position in the novel diagnostic criteria for the disease and in the recent National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association biological definition of AD. Taken together, this progress will likely serve as the basis for a more general introduction of these diagnostic tests in clinical routine practice. However, the heterogeneity of pathology in late-onset AD calls for an expansion of the AD CSF biomarker toolbox with additional biomarkers reflecting additional aspects of AD pathophysiology. One promising candidate is the synaptic protein neurogranin that seems specific for AD and predicts future rate of cognitive deterioration. Further, recent studies bring hope for easily accessible and cost-effective screening tools in the early diagnostic evaluation of patients with cognitive problems (and suspected AD) in primary care. In this respect, technical developments with ultrasensitive immunoassays and novel mass spectrometry techniques give promise of biomarkers to monitor brain amyloidosis (the Aβ42/40 or APP669-711/Aβ42 ratios) and neurodegeneration (tau and neurofilament light proteins) in plasma samples, but future studies are warranted to validate these promising results further.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Blennow, K., & Zetterberg, H. (2018). Biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: current status and prospects for the future. Journal of internal medicine. https://doi.org/10.1111/joim.12816
Vancouver
Blennow K, Zetterberg H. Biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: current status and prospects for the future. Journal of internal medicine. 2018. doi:10.1111/joim.12816. PMID: 30051512.
BibTeX
@article{blennow2018-30051512,
author = {Blennow, K. and Zetterberg, H.},
title = {{Biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: current status and prospects for the future}},
journal = {Journal of internal medicine},
year = {2018},
doi = {10.1111/joim.12816},
pmid = {30051512},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/joim.12816}
}
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
- Standardization efforts have given certified reference materials for CSF Aβ42, with the aim to harmonize results between assay formats that would allow for uniform global reference limits and cut-off values.
- Taken together, this progress will likely serve as the basis for a more general introduction of these diagnostic tests in clinical routine practice.
- In this respect, technical developments with ultrasensitive immunoassays and novel mass spectrometry techniques give promise of biomarkers to monitor brain amyloidosis (the Aβ42/40 or APP669-711/Aβ42 ratios) and neurodegeneration (tau and neurofilament light proteins) in plasma samples, but future studies are warranted to validate these promising results further.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
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. 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of internal medicine) |
| 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 | 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 | — / 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 30051512) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 22 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 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 “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.