Home › Research › Biomarkers
Combining plasma neurofilament light chain and frontotemporal atrophy improves differentiation of bvFTD from primary psychiatric disorders
Sean Coulborn, Ashlin R K Roy, Andrzej Sokolowski, Noah G Cryns, Argentina Lario Lago, Yann Cobigo, Julio C Rojas, Salvatore Spina et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2025-10
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Both atrophy (AUC = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [95% CI: 0.79 to 0.94]) and NfL (AUC = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.96) showed significant predictive ability, which improved when combined (AUC = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87 to 0.99). Misclassification occurred mostly in low atrophy pathological subtypes and PPD with borderline NfL and frontotemporal volume. Combining NfL with atrophy enhances differentiation, but additional markers are needed. HIGHLIGHTS: Atrophy and NfL had comparable effectiveness in differentiating bvFTD from PPD. Combining NfL and frontotemporal atrophy significantly improved predictive accuracy. NfL, in addition to atrophy, may be beneficial in screening for neurodegeneration in ambiguous cases.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Coulborn, S., Roy, A. R. K., Sokolowski, A., Cryns, N. G., Lago, A. L., Cobigo, Y., et al. (2025). Combining plasma neurofilament light chain and frontotemporal atrophy improves differentiation of bvFTD from primary psychiatric disorders. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.70771
Vancouver
Coulborn S, Roy ARK, Sokolowski A, Cryns NG, Lago AL, Cobigo Y, et al. Combining plasma neurofilament light chain and frontotemporal atrophy improves differentiation of bvFTD from primary psychiatric disorders. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2025. doi:10.1002/alz.70771. PMID: 41062916.
BibTeX
@article{coulborn2025-41062916,
author = {Coulborn, Sean and Roy, Ashlin R K and Sokolowski, Andrzej and Cryns, Noah G and Lago, Argentina Lario and Cobigo, Yann and Rojas, Julio C and Spina, Salvatore and others},
title = {{Combining plasma neurofilament light chain and frontotemporal atrophy improves differentiation of bvFTD from primary psychiatric disorders}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1002/alz.70771},
pmid = {41062916},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.70771}
}
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
- Both atrophy (AUC = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [95% CI: 0.79 to 0.94]) and NfL (AUC = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.96) showed significant predictive ability, which improved when combined (AUC = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87 to 0.99).
- Misclassification occurred mostly in low atrophy pathological subtypes and PPD with borderline NfL and frontotemporal volume.
- Combining NfL with atrophy enhances differentiation, but additional markers are needed.
- HIGHLIGHTS: Atrophy and NfL had comparable effectiveness in differentiating bvFTD from PPD.
- Combining NfL and frontotemporal atrophy significantly improved predictive accuracy.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants55
- Effect sizeAUC = 0.87; AUC = 0.89; AUC = 0.93
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 59/100
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 33 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 55 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 41062916) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 33 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 59 out of 100. |
| Total | 59 / 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 Biomarkers
Also in Biomarkers
204 studies in the library are filed under Biomarkers with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Biomarkers hub.