Blood and plasma-based proteomic biomarker research in Alzheimer's disease
Lista S, Faltraco F, Prvulovic D, Hampel H.. Progress in neurobiology, 2012-06-26
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most important cause of dementia in the elderly. The molecular alterations preceding this neurodegenerative pathology may take place even 20 years before its clinical appearance. In this context, the discovery of biomarkers in biological fluids enabling an early presymptomatic diagnosis as well as discrimination from other types of dementia is eagerly awaited. In particular, since the traditional markers obtained both from cerebrospinal fluid inspection and neuroimaging approaches have not achieved a broad clinical application, research efforts have been focused on the development and validation of biomarkers in blood. The benefit of searching for blood-based candidate biomarkers is evident due to the easiness and non-invasiveness nature of blood samples collection compared with any other body fluid. As a result, blood may constitute a rich source of disease biomarkers. Interestingly, among the technological platforms used to perform research into the biomarker discovery arena, proteomics has attained more recent consideration. In the present review, we provide a comprehensive assessment of patterns of biomarkers detected in plasma and serum specimens for the diagnosis of AD by employing proteomic approaches. Currently, growing evidence suggests that blood protein signatures are helpful to increase the likelihood of successful diagnosis of AD. Accordingly, this area of research promises to yield exciting results in the next future.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Lista, S., Faltraco, F., Prvulovic, D., & Hampel, H. (2013). Blood and plasma-based proteomic biomarker research in Alzheimer's disease. Progress in neurobiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2012.06.007
Vancouver
Lista S, Faltraco F, Prvulovic D, Hampel H. Blood and plasma-based proteomic biomarker research in Alzheimer's disease. Progress in neurobiology. 2013. doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2012.06.007. PMID: 22743552.
BibTeX
@article{lista2013-22743552,
author = {Lista, S. and Faltraco, F. and Prvulovic, D. and Hampel, H.},
title = {{Blood and plasma-based proteomic biomarker research in Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Progress in neurobiology},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1016/j.pneurobio.2012.06.007},
pmid = {22743552},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2012.06.007}
}
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
- The benefit of searching for blood-based candidate biomarkers is evident due to the easiness and non-invasiveness nature of blood samples collection compared with any other body fluid.
- As a result, blood may constitute a rich source of disease biomarkers.
- Currently, growing evidence suggests that blood protein signatures are helpful to increase the likelihood of successful diagnosis of AD.
- Accordingly, this area of research promises to yield exciting results in the next future.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Progress in neurobiology) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2013 — within 20 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 22743552) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 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.