Home › Research › Treatments
CHIT1 and DDAH1 levels relate to amyloid-related imaging abnormalities risk profile in Alzheimer's disease patients
Marlies Oosthoek, Everard G B Vijverberg, Elena R Blujdea, Sjors G J G In't Veld, Martín Pucheu Avilés, Sára E Zsadanyi, Yanaika S Hok-A-Hin, Allerdien Visser et al.. Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2025-07-22
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Ninety-four proteins differentiated in the high-risk group compared to low-risk (p < 0.05), none surviving FDR correction. These proteins were enriched for synapse-related proteins and axonogenesis. CHIT1 (vs. low-risk AD: FC = 1.0, p = 0.014, vs. CU: FC = 2.4, p < 0.001) and DDAH1 (vs. low-risk AD: FC=-0.31, p = 0.046, vs. CU: FC = 0.5, p < 0.001) were prioritized as biomarker. DDAH1 protein changes replicated in an independent cohort (FC=-0.37, p = 0.010), and CHIT1 replicated on a trend level (FC = 0.70, p = 0.104). DDAH1 levels had the highest co-expression with synaptic process, energy utilization and RNA-binding cell signaling related proteins (R > 0.8). The findings suggest that in the high risk group, there is a lack of upregulation in synapse and axonogenesis related proteins. High CSF CHIT1 and less increased CSF DDAH1 levels within AD relate to ARIA risk. From the literature, the link to ARIA risk for CHIT1 could be its contribution to innate immunity or vascular amyloid deposition, and for DDAH1 to blood-brain barrier integrity. Biomarker assays are available to assess the potential of CHIT1 and DDAH1 in trials and treatment studies in the clinical setting.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Oosthoek, M., Vijverberg, E. G. B., Blujdea, E. R., Veld, S. G. J. G. I., Avilés, M. P., Zsadanyi, S. E., et al. (2025). CHIT1 and DDAH1 levels relate to amyloid-related imaging abnormalities risk profile in Alzheimer's disease patients. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-025-01799-3
Vancouver
Oosthoek M, Vijverberg EGB, Blujdea ER, Veld SGJGI, Avilés MP, Zsadanyi SE, et al. CHIT1 and DDAH1 levels relate to amyloid-related imaging abnormalities risk profile in Alzheimer's disease patients. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2025. doi:10.1186/s13195-025-01799-3. PMID: 40696469.
BibTeX
@article{oosthoek2025-40696469,
author = {Oosthoek, Marlies and Vijverberg, Everard G B and Blujdea, Elena R and Veld, Sjors G J G In't and Avilés, Martín Pucheu and Zsadanyi, Sára E and Hok-A-Hin, Yanaika S and Visser, Allerdien and others},
title = {{CHIT1 and DDAH1 levels relate to amyloid-related imaging abnormalities risk profile in Alzheimer's disease patients}},
journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1186/s13195-025-01799-3},
pmid = {40696469},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-025-01799-3}
}
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
- Ninety-four proteins differentiated in the high-risk group compared to low-risk (p < 0.05), none surviving FDR correction.
- These proteins were enriched for synapse-related proteins and axonogenesis.
- CHIT1 (vs. low-risk AD: FC = 1.0, p = 0.014, vs.
- CU: FC = 2.4, p < 0.001) and DDAH1 (vs. low-risk AD: FC=-0.31, p = 0.046, vs.
- CU: FC = 0.5, p < 0.001) were prioritized as biomarker.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Participants156
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported 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, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer's research & therapy) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 156 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) |
| 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 40696469) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 31 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100. |
| Total | 55 / 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 Treatments
Also tagged “presenilin”
344 studies in the library carry the topic tag “presenilin”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 344 tagged studies.