Home › Research › Biomarkers
Neuroimaging correlates and biomarker performance of a fully automated plasma p-tau217/Aβ42 ratio assay in a clinical cohort with Alzheimer's disease
Um YH, Wynveen P, Holland M, Bhatt K, Vucetic Z, Engel B, Carlson C, Becker A et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2025-11-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Introduction Blood-based biomarkers offer scalable, non-invasive tools for Alzheimer's disease (AD) detection. We investigated the performance of plasma biomarkers associated with AD on the automated Beckman Coulter Access DxI 9000 analyzer. Methods This cross-sectional study included 262 individuals from across the AD continuum. Plasma phosphorylated tau at threonine 217 (p-tau217), amyloid beta (Aβ)42, and their ratio were measured. Diagnostic accuracy for amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) positivity (Centiloid > 20), using a dual cutoff approach, was assessed via receiver operative characteristic curve. Associations with tau PET (n = 76) were also assessed. Results The p-tau217/Aβ42 ratio showed the highest diagnostic accuracy for amyloid PET positivity (area under curve = 0.943) and the smallest indeterminate zone (8.0%). It correlated strongly and consistently with tau PET across Braak stages and with AD-related cortical atrophy. Discussion The p-tau217/Aβ42 ratio was the most reliable plasma biomarker, closely tracking tau PET. It has potentials for clinical use in diagnosis and treatment monitoring. Highlights This is the first validation of the Beckman Coulter plasma immunoassay. The plasma phosphorylated tau at threonine 217 amyloid beta 42 ratio showed the highest accuracy across the full Alzheimer's disease (AD) spectrum. Plasma biomarkers correlated with tau positron emission tomography and AD-related brain atrophy. Glial fibrillary acidic protein offered complementary value reflecting astrocytic activation.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Um, Y. H., Wynveen, P., Holland, M., Bhatt, K., Vucetic, Z., Engel, B., et al. (2025). Neuroimaging correlates and biomarker performance of a fully automated plasma p-tau217/Aβ42 ratio assay in a clinical cohort with Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.70942
Vancouver
Um YH, Wynveen P, Holland M, Bhatt K, Vucetic Z, Engel B, et al. Neuroimaging correlates and biomarker performance of a fully automated plasma p-tau217/Aβ42 ratio assay in a clinical cohort with Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2025. doi:10.1002/alz.70942. PMID: 41287525.
BibTeX
@article{um2025-41287525,
author = {Um, Y. H. and Wynveen, P. and Holland, M. and Bhatt, K. and Vucetic, Z. and Engel, B. and Carlson, C. and Becker, A. and others},
title = {{Neuroimaging correlates and biomarker performance of a fully automated plasma p-tau217/Aβ42 ratio assay in a clinical cohort with Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1002/alz.70942},
pmid = {41287525},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.70942}
}
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
- We investigated the performance of plasma biomarkers associated with AD on the automated Beckman Coulter Access DxI 9000 analyzer.
- Results The p-tau217/Aβ42 ratio showed the highest diagnostic accuracy for amyloid PET positivity (area under curve = 0.943) and the smallest indeterminate zone (8.0%).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Participants76
- Effect size8.0%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 66/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for 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 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 66 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in time |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 76 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) |
| 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 41287525) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 38 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 66 out of 100. |
| Total | 66 / 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.