alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Home › Research › Biomarkers

Comparison of two plasma p-tau217 assays to detect and monitor Alzheimer's pathology

Therriault J, Ashton NJ, Pola I, Triana-Baltzer G, Brum WS, Di Molfetta G, Arslan B, Rahmouni N et al.. EBioMedicine, 2024-03-11

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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers

Background Blood-based biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD) have become increasingly important as scalable tools for diagnosis and determining clinical trial eligibility. P-tau217 is the most promising due to its excellent sensitivity and specificity for AD-related pathological changes. Methods We compared the performance of two commercially available plasma p-tau217 assays (ALZpath p-tau217 and Janssen p-tau217+) in 294 individuals cross-sectionally. Correlations with amyloid PET and tau PET were assessed, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses evaluated both p-tau217 assays for identifying AD pathology. Findings Both plasma p-tau217 assays were strongly associated with amyloid and tau PET. Furthermore, both plasma p-tau217 assays identified individuals with AD vs other neurodegenerative diseases (ALZpath AUC = 0.95; Janssen AUC = 0.96). Additionally, plasma p-tau217 concentrations rose with AD severity and their annual changes correlated with tau PET annual change. Interpretation Both p-tau217 assays had excellent diagnostic performance for AD. Our study supports the future clinical use of commercially-available assays for p-tau217. Funding This research is supported by the Weston Brain Institute, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging, the Alzheimer's Association, Brain Canada Foundation, the Fonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé and the Colin J. Adair Charitable Foundation.

Key findings

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

Study details

How this study scored 59/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 34 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 59 of 100. Total 59 of 100.34 of the 58 points we could judge = 59 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed 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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (EBioMedicine)
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 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 294 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 38471397)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 34 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 58 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.

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

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.

APA 7th

Therriault, J., Ashton, N. J., Pola, I., Triana-Baltzer, G., Brum, W. S., Di Molfetta, G., et al. (2024). Comparison of two plasma p-tau217 assays to detect and monitor Alzheimer's pathology. EBioMedicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2024.105046

Vancouver

Therriault J, Ashton NJ, Pola I, Triana-Baltzer G, Brum WS, Di Molfetta G, et al. Comparison of two plasma p-tau217 assays to detect and monitor Alzheimer's pathology. EBioMedicine. 2024. doi:10.1016/j.ebiom.2024.105046. PMID: 38471397.

BibTeX

@article{therriault2024-38471397,
  author  = {Therriault, J. and Ashton, N. J. and Pola, I. and Triana-Baltzer, G. and Brum, W. S. and Di Molfetta, G. and Arslan, B. and Rahmouni, N. and others},
  title   = {{Comparison of two plasma p-tau217 assays to detect and monitor Alzheimer's pathology}},
  journal = {EBioMedicine},
  year    = {2024},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.ebiom.2024.105046},
  pmid    = {38471397},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2024.105046}
}

Related studies in Biomarkers

Also tagged “blood-based”

698 studies in the library carry the topic tag “blood-based”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 698 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →