Home › Research › Biomarkers
Blood biomarkers for dementia in Hispanic and non-Hispanic White adults
Mitzi M Gonzales, Meghan I Short, Claudia L Satizabal, Sid O' Bryant, Russel P Tracy, Habil Zare, Sudha Seshadri. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.), 2021-04-09
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
T-tau, NfL, GFAP, and YKL-40 discriminated between diagnostic groups (receiver operating curve: 0.647-0.873). Higher t-tau (odds ratio [OR] = 1.671, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.457-1.917, P < .001), NfL (OR = 2.150, 95% CI = 1.819-2.542, P < .001), GFAP (OR = 2.283, 95% CI = 1.915-2.722, P < .001), and YKL-40 (OR = 1.288, 95% CI = 1.125-1.475, P < .001) were associated with increased likelihood of dementia relative to cognitively unimpaired and mild cognitive impairment groups. Higher NfL was associated with poorer global cognition (β = -0.455, standard error [SE] = 0.083, P < .001), semantic fluency (β = -0.410, SE = 0.133, P = .002), attention/processing speed (β = 2.880, SE = 0.801, P < .001), and executive function (β = 5.965, SE = 2.037, P = .003). Higher GFAP was associated with poorer global cognition (β = -0.345, SE = 0.092, P = .001), learning (β = -1.426, SE = 0.359, P < .001), and memory (β = -0.890, SE = 0.266, P < .001). Higher YKL-40 (β = -0.537, SE = 0.186, P = .004) was associated with lower memory scores. Interactions with ethnicity were observed for learning (NfL, GFAP, YKL-40), memory (NfL, GFAP), and semantic fluency (NfL; interaction terms P < .008), which were generally no longer significant in a demographically matched subset of Hispanic and non-Hispanic White participants. Blood biomarkers of neuronal/axonal and glial injury differentiated between clinical diagnostic groups in a bi-ethnic cohort of Hispanic and non-Hispanic Whites. Our results add to the growing literature indicating that blood biomarkers may be viable tools for detecting neurodegenerative conditions and highlight the importance of validation in diverse cohorts.
Key findings
- T-tau, NfL, GFAP, and YKL-40 discriminated between diagnostic groups (receiver operating curve: 0.647-0.873).
- Higher t-tau (odds ratio [OR] = 1.671, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.457-1.917, P < .001), NfL (OR = 2.150, 95% CI = 1.819-2.542, P < .001), GFAP (OR = 2.283, 95% CI = 1.915-2.722, P < .001), and YKL-40 (OR = 1.288, 95% CI = 1.125-1.475, P < .001) were associated with increased likelihood of dementia relative to cognitively unimpaired and mild cognitive impairment groups.
- Higher NfL was associated with poorer global cognition (β = -0.455, standard error [SE] = 0.083, P < .001), semantic fluency (β = -0.410, SE = 0.133, P = .002), attention/processing speed (β = 2.880, SE = 0.801, P < .001), and executive function (β = 5.965, SE = 2.037, P = .003).
- Higher GFAP was associated with poorer global cognition (β = -0.345, SE = 0.092, P = .001), learning (β = -1.426, SE = 0.359, P < .001), and memory (β = -0.890, SE = 0.266, P < .001).
- Higher YKL-40 (β = -0.537, SE = 0.186, P = .004) was associated with lower memory scores.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants1,193
- Effect sizeOR = 2.150; OR = 2.283; OR = 1.288
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 36 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)) |
| 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 | 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 | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 3 / 4 | 1,193 participants |
| Effect reported | 3 / 3 | Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar) |
| 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 | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 33860071) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 36 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 36 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Gonzales, M. M., Short, M. I., Satizabal, C. L., Bryant, S. O., Tracy, R. P., Zare, H., et al. (2021). Blood biomarkers for dementia in Hispanic and non-Hispanic White adults. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.). https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12164
Vancouver
Gonzales MM, Short MI, Satizabal CL, Bryant SO, Tracy RP, Zare H, et al. Blood biomarkers for dementia in Hispanic and non-Hispanic White adults. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.). 2021. doi:10.1002/trc2.12164. PMID: 33860071.
BibTeX
@article{gonzales2021-33860071,
author = {Gonzales, Mitzi M and Short, Meghan I and Satizabal, Claudia L and Bryant, Sid O' and Tracy, Russel P and Zare, Habil and Seshadri, Sudha},
title = {{Blood biomarkers for dementia in Hispanic and non-Hispanic White adults}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia (New York, N. Y.)},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1002/trc2.12164},
pmid = {33860071},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12164}
}