Home › Research › Biomarkers
Diagnostic accuracy of phosphorylated tau217 in detecting Alzheimer's disease pathology among cognitively impaired and unimpaired: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Mohammad Khalafi, William J. Dartora, Laura Beth J. McIntire, Tracy A. Butler, Krista M. Wartchow, Seyed Hani Hojjati, Qolamreza R. Razlighi, Kiarash Shirbandi, Liangdong Zhou, Kewei Chen, Ke Xi, Samprit Banerjee, Nancy Foldi, Silky Pahlajani, Lidia Glodzik, Yi Li, Mony J. de Leon, Gloria C. Chiang. Alzheimer's & Dementia, 2024-12-23
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Plain-language summary
This meta-analysis pooled 30 studies (nearly 9,800 people from 10 countries) to see how well p-tau217 measured in blood or spinal fluid detects Alzheimer's amyloid and tau pathology compared with PET scans. Blood p-tau217 correctly identified amyloid buildup about 82% of the time (sensitivity) and correctly ruled it out about 86% of the time (specificity), performing similarly to the more invasive spinal fluid test.
What this study adds
Evidence grade: High
This is a pooled review of 9,787 participants. A blood test for p-tau217 detected amyloid buildup with about 82% sensitivity and 86% specificity, similar to the more invasive spinal fluid test. Reported effect size: Plasma p-tau217: 82% sensitivity, 86% specificity; CSF p-tau217: 79% sensitivity, 91% specificity.
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
Khalafi, M., Dartora, W. J., McIntire, L. B. J., Butler, T. A., Wartchow, K. M., Hojjati, S. H., et al. (2024). Diagnostic accuracy of phosphorylated tau217 in detecting Alzheimer's disease pathology among cognitively impaired and unimpaired: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Alzheimer's & Dementia.
Vancouver
Khalafi M, Dartora WJ, McIntire LBJ, Butler TA, Wartchow KM, Hojjati SH, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of phosphorylated tau217 in detecting Alzheimer's disease pathology among cognitively impaired and unimpaired: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Alzheimer's & Dementia. 2024.
BibTeX
@article{khalafi2024-519ae6e6,
author = {Khalafi, Mohammad and Dartora, William J. and McIntire, Laura Beth J. and Butler, Tracy A. and Wartchow, Krista M. and Hojjati, Seyed Hani and Razlighi, Qolamreza R. and Shirbandi, Kiarash and Zhou, Liangdong and Chen, Kewei and Xi, Ke and Banerjee, Samprit and Foldi, Nancy and Pahlajani, Silky and Glodzik, Lidia and Li, Yi and de Leon, Mony J. and Chiang, Gloria C.},
title = {{Diagnostic accuracy of phosphorylated tau217 in detecting Alzheimer's disease pathology among cognitively impaired and unimpaired: A systematic review and meta-analysis}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& Dementia},
year = {2024}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. This record has no DOI, so the citation leaves it out. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 18 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- 30 studies, 9,787 individuals pooled across 10 countries
- Plasma p-tau217: 82% sensitivity, 86% specificity for amyloid detection
- CSF p-tau217: 79% sensitivity, 91% specificity for amyloid detection
- Plasma p-tau217 performance was comparable to CSF p-tau217
Why it matters
A blood test for p-tau217 detected amyloid buildup with about 82% sensitivity and 86% specificity, similar to the more invasive spinal fluid test. This supports using blood p-tau217 as a less invasive way to identify Alzheimer's pathology, though it is a diagnostic accuracy review, not a treatment or cure.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Participants9,787
- Effect sizePlasma p-tau217: 82% sensitivity, 86% specificity; CSF p-tau217: 79% sensitivity, 91% specificity
- Evidence strengthHigh
Limitations
Pooled meta-analysis with between-study heterogeneity in assay platforms and cutoffs; primarily research-cohort populations rather than real-world primary care.
How this study scored 77/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for indexed in PubMed 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, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 48 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 77 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & Dementia) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” 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 | 9,787 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here |
| 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 | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 0 / 2 | No PubMed ID and no DOI — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 48 / 62 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 48 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 77 out of 100. |
| Total | 77 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Biomarkers from nearby years
Also tagged “phosphorylated”
732 studies in the library carry the topic tag “phosphorylated”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 732 tagged studies.