Home › Research › Biomarkers
Diagnostic performance of automated plasma amyloid-β assays combined with pre-analytical immunoprecipitation
Hans-W Klafki, Jonathan Vogelgsang, Ekaterina Manuilova, Chris Bauer, Alexander Jethwa, Hermann Esselmann, Anke Jahn-Brodmann, Dirk Osterloh et al.. Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2022-09-07
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Pre-analytical immunoprecipitation resulted in a significant increase in the area under the ROC curve (AUC) from 0.73 to 0.88 (p = 0.01547) for identifying subjects with abnormal CSF Aβ42/40. A similar improvement in the diagnostic performance by pre-analytical immunoprecipitation was also observed when a biomarker-supported clinical diagnosis was used as a second endpoint (AUC increase from 0.77 to 0.92, p = 0.01576). Our preliminary observations indicate that pre-analytical Aβ immunoprecipitation can improve the diagnostic performance of plasma Aβ assays for detecting brain amyloid pathology. The findings may aid in the further development of blood-based immunoassays for Alzheimer's disease ultimately suitable for screening and routine use.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Klafki, H.-W., Vogelgsang, J., Manuilova, E., Bauer, C., Jethwa, A., Esselmann, H., et al. (2022). Diagnostic performance of automated plasma amyloid-β assays combined with pre-analytical immunoprecipitation. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-022-01071-y
Vancouver
Klafki H.-W, Vogelgsang J, Manuilova E, Bauer C, Jethwa A, Esselmann H, et al. Diagnostic performance of automated plasma amyloid-β assays combined with pre-analytical immunoprecipitation. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2022. doi:10.1186/s13195-022-01071-y. PMID: 36071505.
BibTeX
@article{klafki2022-36071505,
author = {Klafki, Hans-W and Vogelgsang, Jonathan and Manuilova, Ekaterina and Bauer, Chris and Jethwa, Alexander and Esselmann, Hermann and Jahn-Brodmann, Anke and Osterloh, Dirk and others},
title = {{Diagnostic performance of automated plasma amyloid-β assays combined with pre-analytical immunoprecipitation}},
journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1186/s13195-022-01071-y},
pmid = {36071505},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-022-01071-y}
}
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
- Pre-analytical immunoprecipitation resulted in a significant increase in the area under the ROC curve (AUC) from 0.73 to 0.88 (p = 0.01547) for identifying subjects with abnormal CSF Aβ42/40.
- A similar improvement in the diagnostic performance by pre-analytical immunoprecipitation was also observed when a biomarker-supported clinical diagnosis was used as a second endpoint (AUC increase from 0.77 to 0.92, p = 0.01576).
- Our preliminary observations indicate that pre-analytical Aβ immunoprecipitation can improve the diagnostic performance of plasma Aβ assays for detecting brain amyloid pathology.
- The findings may aid in the further development of blood-based immunoassays for Alzheimer's disease ultimately suitable for screening and routine use.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants42
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and 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 27 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 48 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 | 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 | 3 / 5 | 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 42 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) |
| 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 36071505) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 27 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100. |
| Total | 48 / 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
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.