Home › Research › Biomarkers
Development of thresholds and a visualization tool for use of a blood test in routine clinical dementia practice
Verberk IMW, Jutte J, Kingma MY, Vigneswaran S, Gouda MMTEE, van Engelen MP, Alcolea D, Arranz J et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2024-08-03
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Introduction We developed a multimarker blood test result interpretation tool for the clinical dementia practice, including phosphorylated (P-)tau181, amyloid-beta (Abeta)42/40, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light (NfL). Methods We measured the plasma biomarkers with Simoa (n = 1199), applied LASSO regression for biomarker selection and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses to determine diagnostic accuracy. We validated our findings in two independent cohorts and constructed a visualization approach. Results P-tau181, GFAP, and NfL were selected. This combination had area under the curve (AUC) = 83% to identify amyloid positivity in pre-dementia stages, AUC = 87%-89% to differentiate Alzheimer's or controls from frontotemporal dementia, AUC = 74%-76% to differentiate Alzheimer's or controls from dementia with Lewy bodies. Highly reproducible AUCs were obtained in independent cohorts. The resulting visualization tool includes UpSet plots to visualize the stand-alone biomarker results and density plots to visualize the biomarker results combined. Discussion Our multimarker blood test interpretation tool is ready for testing in real-world clinical dementia settings. Highlights We developed a multimarker blood test interpretation tool for clinical dementia practice. Our interpretation tool includes plasma biomarkers P-tau, GFAP, and NfL. Our tool is particularly useful for Alzheimer's and frontotemporal dementia diagnosis.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Verberk, I. M. W., Jutte, J., Kingma, M. Y., Vigneswaran, S., MMTEE, G., van Engelen, M. P., et al. (2024). Development of thresholds and a visualization tool for use of a blood test in routine clinical dementia practice. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14088
Vancouver
Verberk IMW, Jutte J, Kingma MY, Vigneswaran S, MMTEE G, van Engelen MP, et al. Development of thresholds and a visualization tool for use of a blood test in routine clinical dementia practice. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2024. doi:10.1002/alz.14088. PMID: 39096164.
BibTeX
@article{verberk2024-39096164,
author = {Verberk, I. M. W. and Jutte, J. and Kingma, M. Y. and Vigneswaran, S. and MMTEE, Gouda and van Engelen, M. P. and Alcolea, D. and Arranz, J. and others},
title = {{Development of thresholds and a visualization tool for use of a blood test in routine clinical dementia practice}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1002/alz.14088},
pmid = {39096164},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14088}
}
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
- Introduction We developed a multimarker blood test result interpretation tool for the clinical dementia practice, including phosphorylated (P-)tau181, amyloid-beta (Abeta)42/40, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and neurofilament light (NfL).
- We validated our findings in two independent cohorts and constructed a visualization approach.
- Results P-tau181, GFAP, and NfL were selected.
- The resulting visualization tool includes UpSet plots to visualize the stand-alone biomarker results and density plots to visualize the biomarker results combined.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants1,199
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 59/100
Published in a leading specialty 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 34 of the 58 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 | 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 3 / 4 | 1,199 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 39096164) |
| 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.
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “blood”
6 studies in the library carry the topic tag “blood”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 6 tagged studies.