This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

50/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers

The definition of Alzheimer's disease (AD) now considers the presence of the markers of amyloid (A), tau deposition (T), and neurodegeneration (N) essential for diagnosis. AD patients have been reported to have increased blood-brain barrier (BBB) dysfunction, but that has not been tested within the ATN framework so far. As the field is moving towards the use of blood-based biomarkers, the relationship between BBB disruption and AD-specific biomarkers requires considerable attention. Moreover, other factors have been previously implicated in modulating BBB permeability, including age, gender, and ApoE status. A total of 172 cognitively impaired individuals underwent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis for AD biomarkers, and data on BBB dysfunction, demographics, and ApoE status were collected. Our data showed that there was no difference in BBB dysfunction across different ATN subtypes, and that BBB damage was not correlated with cognitive impairment. However, patients with BBB disruption, if measured with a high Qalb, had low Aβ40 levels. ApoE status did not affect BBB function but had a dose-dependent effect on the Aβ42/40 ratio. These results might highlight the importance of understanding dynamic changes across the BBB in future studies in patients with AD.

Key findings

Our data showed that there was no difference in BBB dysfunction across different ATN subtypes, and that BBB damage was not correlated with cognitive impairment.
These results might highlight the importance of understanding dynamic changes across the BBB in future studies in patients with AD.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →

Study details

Participants172
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 50/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 50 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International journal of molecular sciences)
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	3 / 5	2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	2 / 4	172 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	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 37569528)
Free to read	— / 2	Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points	28 / 56	Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 50 out of 100.
Total	50 / 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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Toniolo, S., Di Lorenzo, F., Bernardini, S., Mercuri, N. B., & Sancesario, G. M. (2023). Blood-Brain Barrier Dysfunction and Aβ42/40 Ratio Dose-Dependent Modulation with the ApoE Genotype within the ATN Framework. International journal of molecular sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241512151

Vancouver

Toniolo S, Di Lorenzo F, Bernardini S, Mercuri NB, Sancesario GM. Blood-Brain Barrier Dysfunction and Aβ42/40 Ratio Dose-Dependent Modulation with the ApoE Genotype within the ATN Framework. International journal of molecular sciences. 2023. doi:10.3390/ijms241512151. PMID: 37569528.

BibTeX

@article{toniolo2023-37569528,
  author  = {Toniolo, Sofia and Di Lorenzo, Francesco and Bernardini, Sergio and Mercuri, Nicola Biagio and Sancesario, Giulia Maria},
  title   = {{Blood-Brain Barrier Dysfunction and Aβ42/40 Ratio Dose-Dependent Modulation with the ApoE Genotype within the ATN Framework}},
  journal = {International journal of molecular sciences},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.3390/ijms241512151},
  pmid    = {37569528},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241512151}
}

Related studies in Biomarkers

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →