Home › Research › Tau biomarkers
Diagnostic Impact of Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarker (Pre-)Analytical Variability in Alzheimer's Disease
Ellis Niemantsverdriet, Joery Goossens, Hanne Struyfs, Jean-Jacques Martin, Johan Goeman, Peter Paul De Deyn, Hugo Vanderstichele, Sebastiaan Engelborghs. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2016
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Intra- and inter-laboratory variability of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker analyses remains an important issue. We investigated the clinical-diagnostic impact of CSF biomarker concentration shifts in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and autopsy-confirmed Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia patients. MCI patients (n = 85), autopsy-confirmed AD dementia patients (n = 72), and cognitively healthy controls (n = 100) were included in this prospective, longitudinal study. AD dementia patients were followed up until death, and controls were included from 1992 until 2003. In-house validated cutoff values of biomarkers were applied: Aβ1-42 <638.5 pg/mL, T-tau>296.5 pg/mL, P-tau(181P) >56.5 pg/mL. Both increments and decrements (from ± 5% to ± 40% ) were added to the true (=observed) CSF biomarker values, imitating the anticipated differences in biomarker concentrations. Within certain limits, the clinical diagnostic performance of AD CSF biomarkers remains largely unchanged and clinical diagnostic accuracy deviated less than 8.2% from the reference when concentration shifts ranging between -20% and +20% were added to one of the three CSF biomarkers in MCI and autopsy-confirmed AD patients. Notwithstanding the fact that (pre- and post-)analytical parameters can affect the clinical classification, the present exploratory study provides evidence that for a specific context of use, the impact on clinical accuracy of biomarker concentration shifts might be lower than originally expected. In conclusion, induced shifts of ±20% in only one of the three biomarkers has limited impact on the clinical accuracy of AD CSF biomarkers in MCI and autopsy-confirmed AD patients when using the IWG-2 criteria.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Niemantsverdriet, E., Goossens, J., Struyfs, H., Martin, J.-J., Goeman, J., De Deyn, P. P., et al. (2016). Diagnostic Impact of Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarker (Pre-)Analytical Variability in Alzheimer's Disease. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-150953
Vancouver
Niemantsverdriet E, Goossens J, Struyfs H, Martin J.-J, Goeman J, De Deyn PP, et al. Diagnostic Impact of Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarker (Pre-)Analytical Variability in Alzheimer's Disease. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2016. doi:10.3233/jad-150953. PMID: 26836187.
BibTeX
@article{niemantsverdriet2016-26836187,
author = {Niemantsverdriet, Ellis and Goossens, Joery and Struyfs, Hanne and Martin, Jean-Jacques and Goeman, Johan and De Deyn, Peter Paul and Vanderstichele, Hugo and Engelborghs, Sebastiaan},
title = {{Diagnostic Impact of Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarker (Pre-)Analytical Variability in Alzheimer's Disease}},
journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.3233/jad-150953},
pmid = {26836187},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-150953}
}
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 names 8 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
- In conclusion, induced shifts of ±20% in only one of the three biomarkers has limited impact on the clinical accuracy of AD CSF biomarkers in MCI and autopsy-confirmed AD patients when using the IWG-2 criteria.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants85
- Effect size8.2%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for randomized / 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, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 36 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 85 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 | No randomization 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 26836187) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 36 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 36 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 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 Tau biomarkers
Also tagged “p-tau217”
692 studies in the library carry the topic tag “p-tau217”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 692 tagged studies.