Home › Research › Biomarkers
Comparison of plasma soluble and extracellular vesicles-associated biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease patients and cognitively normal individuals
Boyer E, Deltenre L, Dourte M, Colmant L, Paître E, Sleegers K, Suelves N, Hanseeuw B et al.. Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2024-06-28
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Background Amyloid-β (Aβ) and tau are brain hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD), also present in blood as soluble biomarkers or encapsulated in extracellular vesicles (EVs). Our goal was to assess how soluble plasma biomarkers of AD pathology correlate with the number and content of EVs. Methods Single-molecule enzyme-linked assays were used to quantify Aβ42/40 and tau in plasma samples and neurally-derived EVs (NDEVs) from a cohort of APOE ε4- (n = 168) and APOE ε4+ (n = 68) cognitively normal individuals and AD patients (n = 55). The ratio of CD56 (Neuronal cell-adhesion molecule) to CD81 signal measured by ELISA-DELFIA was used for the relative quantification of NDEVs in plasma samples. Results The soluble plasma Aβ42/40 ratio is decreased in AD patients compared to cognitively normal individuals. The amount and content (Aβ40, Aβ42, tau) of plasma NDEVs were similar between groups. Plasma NDEVs quantity remain consistent with aging and between AD and CN individuals. However, the quantity of soluble biomarkers was negatively correlated to NDEVs number in cognitively normal individuals, while in AD patients, this correlation is lost, suggesting a shift in the mechanism underpinning the production and the release of these biomarkers in pathological conditions. Conclusion Soluble plasma Aβ42/40 ratio is the most robust biomarker to discriminate between AD patients and CN individuals, as it normalizes for the number of NDEVs. Analysis of NDEVs and their content pointed toward peculiar mechanisms of Aβ release in AD. Further research on independent cohorts can confirm our findings and assess whether plasma Aβ and tau need correction by NDEVs for better AD risk identification in CN populations.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Boyer, E., Deltenre, L., Dourte, M., Colmant, L., Paître, E., Sleegers, K., et al. (2024). Comparison of plasma soluble and extracellular vesicles-associated biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease patients and cognitively normal individuals. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-024-01508-6
Vancouver
Boyer E, Deltenre L, Dourte M, Colmant L, Paître E, Sleegers K, et al. Comparison of plasma soluble and extracellular vesicles-associated biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease patients and cognitively normal individuals. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2024. doi:10.1186/s13195-024-01508-6. PMID: 38943196.
BibTeX
@article{boyer2024-38943196,
author = {Boyer, E. and Deltenre, L. and Dourte, M. and Colmant, L. and Paître, E. and Sleegers, K. and Suelves, N. and Hanseeuw, B. and others},
title = {{Comparison of plasma soluble and extracellular vesicles-associated biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease patients and cognitively normal individuals}},
journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1186/s13195-024-01508-6},
pmid = {38943196},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-024-01508-6}
}
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
- Results The soluble plasma Aβ42/40 ratio is decreased in AD patients compared to cognitively normal individuals.
- Further research on independent cohorts can confirm our findings and assess whether plasma Aβ and tau need correction by NDEVs for better AD risk identification in CN populations.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants168
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 57/100
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 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 57 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 | 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 168 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 38943196) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 33 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 57 out of 100. |
| Total | 57 / 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 tagged “extracellular”
2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “extracellular”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.