Home › Research › Biomarkers
Optimal combinations of CSF biomarkers for predicting cognitive decline and clinical conversion in cognitively unimpaired participants and mild cognitive impairment patients: A multi-cohort study
Salvadó G, Larsson V, Cody KA, Cullen NC, Jonaitis EM, Stomrud E, Kollmorgen G, Wild N et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2023-01-17
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Introduction Our objective was determining the optimal combinations of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for predicting disease progression in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other neurodegenerative diseases. Methods We included 1,983 participants from three different cohorts with longitudinal cognitive and clinical data, and baseline CSF levels of Aβ42, Aβ40, phosphorylated tau at threonine-181 (p-tau), neurofilament light (NfL), neurogranin, α-synuclein, soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (sTREM2), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), YKL-40, S100b, and interleukin 6 (IL-6) (Elecsys NeuroToolKit). Results Change of modified Preclinical Alzheimer's Cognitive Composite (mPACC) in cognitively unimpaired (CU) was best predicted by p-tau/Aβ42 alone (R 2 ≥ 0.31) or together with NfL (R 2 = 0.25), while p-tau/Aβ42 (R 2 ≥ 0.19) was sufficient to accurately predict change of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients. P-tau/Aβ42 (AUC ≥ 0.87) and p-tau/Aβ42 together with NfL (AUC ≥ 0.75) were the best predictors of conversion to AD and all-cause dementia, respectively. Discussion P-tau/Aβ42 is sufficient for predicting progression in AD, with very high accuracy. Adding NfL improves the prediction of all-cause dementia conversion and cognitive decline.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Salvadó, G., Larsson, V., Cody, K. A., Cullen, N. C., Jonaitis, E. M., Stomrud, E., et al. (2023). Optimal combinations of CSF biomarkers for predicting cognitive decline and clinical conversion in cognitively unimpaired participants and mild cognitive impairment patients: A multi-cohort study. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12907
Vancouver
Salvadó G, Larsson V, Cody KA, Cullen NC, Jonaitis EM, Stomrud E, et al. Optimal combinations of CSF biomarkers for predicting cognitive decline and clinical conversion in cognitively unimpaired participants and mild cognitive impairment patients: A multi-cohort study. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2023. doi:10.1002/alz.12907. PMID: 36648169.
BibTeX
@article{salvado2023-36648169,
author = {Salvadó, G. and Larsson, V. and Cody, K. A. and Cullen, N. C. and Jonaitis, E. M. and Stomrud, E. and Kollmorgen, G. and Wild, N. and others},
title = {{Optimal combinations of CSF biomarkers for predicting cognitive decline and clinical conversion in cognitively unimpaired participants and mild cognitive impairment patients: A multi-cohort study}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1002/alz.12907},
pmid = {36648169},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12907}
}
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
- Results Change of modified Preclinical Alzheimer's Cognitive Composite (mPACC) in cognitively unimpaired (CU) was best predicted by p-tau/Aβ42 alone (R 2 ≥ 0.31) or together with NfL (R 2 = 0.25), while p-tau/Aβ42 (R 2 ≥ 0.19) was sufficient to accurately predict change of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants1,983
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 69/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for 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 40 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 69 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 | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” 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 | 3 / 4 | 1,983 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 36648169) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 40 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 69 out of 100. |
| Total | 69 / 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.