Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Blood proteins can be used for biomarkers to monitor the progression of cognitive decline, even in the early stages of disease. In this study, we developed a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS)-based blood test to identify plasma proteins that can be used to detect mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Using this system, we quantified plasma proteins using isotope-labeled synthetic peptides. A total of 192 patients, including 63 with AD, 71 with MCI, and 58 non-demented controls (NDCs), were analyzed. Multinomial regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed to identify specific combinations of plasma protein panels that could differentiate among NDCs, those with MCI, and those with AD. We identified eight plasma protein biomarker candidates that can be used to distinguish between MCI and AD. These biomarkers were associated with coagulation pathways, innate immunity, lipid metabolism, and nutrition. The clinical potential to differentiate cognitive impairment from NDC was assessed using area under the curve values from ROC analysis, which yielded values of 0.83 for males and 0.71 for females. This LC-MS-based plasma protein panel allows the pathophysiology of AD to be followed through detection of cognitive decline and disease progression markers.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Inoue, M., Suzuki, H., Meno, K., Liu, S., Korenaga, T., & Uchida, K. (2023). Identification of Plasma Proteins as Biomarkers for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease Using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry. International journal of molecular sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241713064

Vancouver

Inoue M, Suzuki H, Meno K, Liu S, Korenaga T, Uchida K. Identification of Plasma Proteins as Biomarkers for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease Using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry. International journal of molecular sciences. 2023. doi:10.3390/ijms241713064. PMID: 37685872.

BibTeX

@article{inoue2023-37685872,
  author  = {Inoue, M. and Suzuki, H. and Meno, K. and Liu, S. and Korenaga, T. and Uchida, K.},
  title   = {{Identification of Plasma Proteins as Biomarkers for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease Using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry}},
  journal = {International journal of molecular sciences},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.3390/ijms241713064},
  pmid    = {37685872},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241713064}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 52/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 30 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 52 of 100. Total 52 of 100.30 of the 58 points we could judge = 52 of 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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International journal of molecular sciences)
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 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 192 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 37685872)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 30 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100.
Total 52 / 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.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Biomarkers

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →