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.

60/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Global PET amyloid burden was compared with regards to cognitive status, APOE ɛ4 status, sex, age, and estimated years to symptom onset. PET amyloid centiloid and CSF Aβ42/40 were negatively correlated in carriers of autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease mutations (n=216; r=-0·565; p Interpretation Despite minor differences, amyloid PET changes were similar between people with autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease versus Down syndrome and strongly supported early amyloid dysregulation in individuals with Down syndrome.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Low

This is a cross-sectional study of 216 participants. This cross-sectional study found that amyloid PET changes were similar between people with autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease and people with Down syndrome, supporting early amyloid dysregulation in Down syndrome. It is a diagnostic imaging study and does not report any treatment, cure, or prevention of Alzheimer's disease.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Boerwinkle, A. H., Gordon, B. A., Wisch, J., Flores, S., Henson, R. L., Butt, O. H., et al. (2023). Comparison of amyloid burden in individuals with Down syndrome versus autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease: a cross-sectional study. The Lancet. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(22)00408-2

Vancouver

Boerwinkle AH, Gordon BA, Wisch J, Flores S, Henson RL, Butt OH, et al. Comparison of amyloid burden in individuals with Down syndrome versus autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease: a cross-sectional study. The Lancet. Neurology. 2023. doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(22)00408-2. PMID: 36517172.

BibTeX

@article{boerwinkle2023-36517172,
  author  = {Boerwinkle, A. H. and Gordon, B. A. and Wisch, J. and Flores, S. and Henson, R. L. and Butt, O. H. and McKay, N. and Chen, C. D. and others},
  title   = {{Comparison of amyloid burden in individuals with Down syndrome versus autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease: a cross-sectional study}},
  journal = {The Lancet. Neurology},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.1016/s1474-4422(22)00408-2},
  pmid    = {36517172},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(22)00408-2}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: this is a cross-sectional study. Everyone is measured once, so it cannot show which came first. Read it as a snapshot of how two things go together at one moment.
Size: the record lists 216 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Global PET amyloid burden was compared with regards to cognitive status, APOE ɛ4 status, sex, age, and estimated years to symptom onset.
PET amyloid centiloid and CSF Aβ42/40 were negatively correlated in carriers of autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease mutations (n=216; r=-0·565; p<0·0001) and in people with Down syndrome (n=32; r=-0·801; p<0·0001).

Why it matters

This cross-sectional study found that amyloid PET changes were similar between people with autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease and people with Down syndrome, supporting early amyloid dysregulation in Down syndrome. It is a diagnostic imaging study and does not report any treatment, cure, or prevention of Alzheimer's disease.

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

Study details

Study designcross-sectional
Participants216
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 60/100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 58 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 60 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Lancet. Neurology)
Journal's citation record	3 / 4	The Lancet Neurology: journal h-index 457 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	4 / 12	A snapshot of people at one point in time
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	216 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	4 / 7	Cited 55 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	3 / 5	11.0 citations a year over 5 year(s) since 2023
Impact for its field and year	3 / 6	Cited 7.2× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	3 / 6	Cited by 13 other studies in this library
Still being cited	2 / 4	Cited 44 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	— / 4	OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Anna Diffenbacher holds only 8 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score
Institution's track record	3 / 3	Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	3 / 3	OpenAlex lists 12 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 36517172)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	58 / 96	Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 58 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 60 out of 100.
Total	60 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — PubMed Central lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 10 Oct 2026).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 26.

Later studies that cite this one

13 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Biomarkers from nearby years

Also tagged “down”

527 studies in the library carry the topic tag “down”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 527 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →