Home › Research › Biomarkers
High-Throughput Mass Spectrometry Assay for Quantifying β-Amyloid 40 and 42 in Cerebrospinal Fluid
Darren M Weber, Diana Tran, Scott M Goldman, Steven W Taylor, Edward I Ginns, Robert J Lagier, Robert A Rissman, James B Brewer et al.. Clinical chemistry, 2019-10-18
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
The assay had a reportable range of 100 to 25000 pg/mL, a limit of quantification of 100 pg/mL, recoveries between 93% and 111%, and intraassay and interassay CV <15% for both peptides. An Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio cutoff of <0.16 had a clinical sensitivity of 78% for distinguishing patients with AD from non-AD dementia (clinical specificity, 91%) and from healthy controls (clinical specificity, 81%). The Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio decreased significantly (P < 0.001) with increasing dose of APOE4 alleles. This assay can be used to determine Aβ42/Aβ40 ratios, which correlate with the presence of AD.
Key findings
- The assay had a reportable range of 100 to 25000 pg/mL, a limit of quantification of 100 pg/mL, recoveries between 93% and 111%, and intraassay and interassay CV <15% for both peptides.
- An Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio cutoff of <0.16 had a clinical sensitivity of 78% for distinguishing patients with AD from non-AD dementia (clinical specificity, 91%) and from healthy controls (clinical specificity, 81%).
- The Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio decreased significantly (P < 0.001) with increasing dose of APOE4 alleles.
- This assay can be used to determine Aβ42/Aβ40 ratios, which correlate with the presence of AD.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants102
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
Published in a peer-reviewed 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, multi-centre 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 (Clinical chemistry) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 102 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 31628138) |
| 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Weber, D. M., Tran, D., Goldman, S. M., Taylor, S. W., Ginns, E. I., Lagier, R. J., et al. (2019). High-Throughput Mass Spectrometry Assay for Quantifying β-Amyloid 40 and 42 in Cerebrospinal Fluid. Clinical chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2018.300947
Vancouver
Weber DM, Tran D, Goldman SM, Taylor SW, Ginns EI, Lagier RJ, et al. High-Throughput Mass Spectrometry Assay for Quantifying β-Amyloid 40 and 42 in Cerebrospinal Fluid. Clinical chemistry. 2019. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2018.300947. PMID: 31628138.
BibTeX
@article{weber2019-31628138,
author = {Weber, Darren M and Tran, Diana and Goldman, Scott M and Taylor, Steven W and Ginns, Edward I and Lagier, Robert J and Rissman, Robert A and Brewer, James B and others},
title = {{High-Throughput Mass Spectrometry Assay for Quantifying β-Amyloid 40 and 42 in Cerebrospinal Fluid}},
journal = {Clinical chemistry},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1373/clinchem.2018.300947},
pmid = {31628138},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2018.300947}
}
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “blood-based”
698 studies in the library carry the topic tag “blood-based”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 698 tagged studies.