Home › Research › Biomarkers
Fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia: past, present and future
Swift IJ, Sogorb-Esteve A, Heller C, Synofzik M, Otto M, Otto M, Graff C, Galimberti D et al.. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2020-11-13
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The frontotemporal dementia (FTD) spectrum of neurodegenerative disorders includes a heterogeneous group of conditions. However, following on from a series of important molecular studies in the early 2000s, major advances have now been made in the understanding of the pathological and genetic underpinnings of the disease. In turn, alongside the development of novel methodologies for measuring proteins and other molecules in biological fluids, the last 10 years have seen a huge increase in biomarker studies within FTD. This recent past has focused on attempting to develop markers that will help differentiate FTD from other dementias (particularly Alzheimer's disease (AD)), as well as from non-neurodegenerative conditions such as primary psychiatric disorders. While cerebrospinal fluid, and more recently blood, markers of AD have been successfully developed, specific markers identifying primary tauopathies or TDP-43 proteinopathies are still lacking. More focus at the moment has been on non-specific markers of neurodegeneration, and in particular, multiple studies of neurofilament light chain have highlighted its importance as a diagnostic, prognostic and staging marker of FTD. As clinical trials get under way in specific genetic forms of FTD, measures of progranulin and dipeptide repeat proteins in biofluids have become important potential measures of therapeutic response. However, understanding of whether drugs restore cellular function will also be important, and studies of key pathophysiological processes, including neuroinflammation, lysosomal function and synaptic health, are also now becoming more common. There is much still to learn in the fluid biomarker field in FTD, but the creation of large multinational cohorts is facilitating better powered studies and will pave the way for larger omics studies, including proteomics, metabolomics and lipidomics, as well as investigations of multimodal biomarker combinations across fluids, brain imaging and other domains. Here we provide an overview of the past, present and future of fluid biomarkers within the FTD field.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Swift, I. J., Sogorb-Esteve, A., Heller, C., Synofzik, M., Otto, M., Graff, C., et al. (2021). Fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia: past, present and future. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2020-323520
Vancouver
Swift IJ, Sogorb-Esteve A, Heller C, Synofzik M, Otto M, Graff C, et al. Fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia: past, present and future. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. 2021. doi:10.1136/jnnp-2020-323520. PMID: 33188134.
BibTeX
@article{swift2021-33188134,
author = {Swift, I. J. and Sogorb-Esteve, A. and Heller, C. and Synofzik, M. and Otto, M. and Graff, C. and Galimberti, D. and others},
title = {{Fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia: past, present and future}},
journal = {Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1136/jnnp-2020-323520},
pmid = {33188134},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2020-323520}
}
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
- More focus at the moment has been on non-specific markers of neurodegeneration, and in particular, multiple studies of neurofilament light chain have highlighted its importance as a diagnostic, prognostic and staging marker of FTD.
- As clinical trials get under way in specific genetic forms of FTD, measures of progranulin and dipeptide repeat proteins in biofluids have become important potential measures of therapeutic response.
- However, understanding of whether drugs restore cellular function will also be important, and studies of key pathophysiological processes, including neuroinflammation, lysosomal function and synaptic health, are also now becoming more common.
- There is much still to learn in the fluid biomarker field in FTD, but the creation of large multinational cohorts is facilitating better powered studies and will pave the way for larger omics studies, including proteomics, metabolomics and lipidomics, as well as investigations of multimodal biomarker combinations across fluids, brain imaging and other domains.
- Here we provide an overview of the past, present and future of fluid biomarkers within the FTD field.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry) |
| 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 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 33188134) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 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 “fluid-biomarkers”
5 studies in the library carry the topic tag “fluid-biomarkers”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 5 tagged studies.