Comparative proteomics of cerebrospinal fluid in neuropathologically-confirmed Alzheimer's disease and non-demented elderly subjects
Castaño EM, Roher AE, Esh CL, Kokjohn TA, Beach T.. Neurological research, 2006-03-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Objectives Diagnostic tests able to reveal Alzheimer's disease (AD) in living patients before cognitive ability is destroyed are urgently needed. Such tests must distinguish AD from other dementia causes, as well as differentiate subtle changes associated with normal aging from true pathology emergence. A single biomarker offering such diagnostic and prognostic capacities has eluded identification. Therefore, a valuable test for AD is likely to be based on a specific pattern of change in a set of proteins, rather than a single protein. Methods We examined pooled cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples obtained from neuropathologically-confirmed AD (n=43) and non-demented control subjects (n=43) using 2-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2DE) proteomic methodology to detect differentially expressed proteins. Proteins exhibiting expression level differences between the pools were recovered and identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry. Results Five differentially-expressed proteins with potential roles in amyloid-beta metabolism and vascular and brain physiology [apolipoprotein A-1 (Apo A-1), cathepsin D (CatD), hemopexin (HPX), transthyretin (TTR), and two pigment epithelium-derived factor (PEDF) isoforms] were identified. Apo A-1, CatD and TTR were significantly reduced in the AD pool sample, while HPX and the PEDF isoforms were increased in AD CSF. Discussion These results suggest that multi-factor proteomic pattern analysis of the CSF may provide a means to diagnose and assess AD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Castaño, E. M., Roher, A. E., Esh, C. L., Kokjohn, T. A., & Beach, T. (2006). Comparative proteomics of cerebrospinal fluid in neuropathologically-confirmed Alzheimer's disease and non-demented elderly subjects. Neurological research. https://doi.org/10.1179/016164106x98035
Vancouver
Castaño EM, Roher AE, Esh CL, Kokjohn TA, Beach T. Comparative proteomics of cerebrospinal fluid in neuropathologically-confirmed Alzheimer's disease and non-demented elderly subjects. Neurological research. 2006. doi:10.1179/016164106x98035. PMID: 16551433.
BibTeX
@article{castano2006-16551433,
author = {Castaño, E. M. and Roher, A. E. and Esh, C. L. and Kokjohn, T. A. and Beach, T.},
title = {{Comparative proteomics of cerebrospinal fluid in neuropathologically-confirmed Alzheimer's disease and non-demented elderly subjects}},
journal = {Neurological research},
year = {2006},
doi = {10.1179/016164106x98035},
pmid = {16551433},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1179/016164106x98035}
}
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
- Such tests must distinguish AD from other dementia causes, as well as differentiate subtle changes associated with normal aging from true pathology emergence.
- Results Five differentially-expressed proteins with potential roles in amyloid-beta metabolism and vascular and brain physiology [apolipoprotein A-1 (Apo A-1), cathepsin D (CatD), hemopexin (HPX), transthyretin (TTR), and two pigment epithelium-derived factor (PEDF) isoforms] were identified.
- Apo A-1, CatD and TTR were significantly reduced in the AD pool sample, while HPX and the PEDF isoforms were increased in AD CSF.
- Discussion These results suggest that multi-factor proteomic pattern analysis of the CSF may provide a means to diagnose and assess AD.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Participants43
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neurological research) |
| 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 | 2006 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 43 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 16551433) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 25 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 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 Genetics
Also tagged “non-demented-elderly”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “non-demented-elderly”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.