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 48 out of 100. Risk genes beyond APOE

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Background Plasma amyloid [beta]-peptide (A[beta]) 40 and A[beta]42 levels are increased in persons with mutations causing early-onset familial Alzheimer's disease (AD). Plasma A[beta]42 levels were also used to link microsatellite genetic markers to a putative AD genetic locus on chromosome 10 and were observed in patients with incipient sporadic AD. Methods The authors measured plasma A[beta]40 and A[beta]42 levels using a sandwich ELISA after the initial examination of 530 individuals participating in an epidemiologic study of aging and dementia. Participants were examined at 18-month intervals, and plasma A[beta]40 and A[beta]42 levels were repeated in 307 subjects 3 years after baseline. Results Compared with individuals who never developed AD, patients with AD at baseline and those who developed AD during the follow-up had significantly higher A[beta]42, but not A[beta]40, plasma levels. The risk of AD in the highest quartile of plasma A[beta]42 was increased by more than twofold over that in the lowest quartile. The highest plasma A[beta]42 levels were observed in patients with AD who died during the follow-up. Plasma A[beta]42, but not A[beta]40, levels decreased over time in patients with newly acquired AD. Conclusions Plasma A[beta]40 and A[beta]42 increase with age and are strongly correlated with each other. Plasma A[beta]40 and A[beta]42 levels are elevated in some patients before and during the early stages of AD but decline thereafter. High plasma A[beta]42 levels may also be associated with mortality in patients with AD.

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

APA 7th

Mayeux, R., Honig, L. S., Tang, M. X., Manly, J., Stern, Y., Schupf, N., et al. (2003). Plasma A[beta]40 and A[beta]42 and Alzheimer's disease: relation to age, mortality, and risk. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000091890.32140.8f

Vancouver

Mayeux R, Honig LS, Tang MX, Manly J, Stern Y, Schupf N, et al. Plasma A[beta]40 and A[beta]42 and Alzheimer's disease: relation to age, mortality, and risk. Neurology. 2003. doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000091890.32140.8f. PMID: 14610118.

BibTeX

@article{mayeux2003-14610118,
  author  = {Mayeux, R. and Honig, L. S. and Tang, M. X. and Manly, J. and Stern, Y. and Schupf, N. and Mehta, P. D.},
  title   = {{Plasma A[beta]40 and A[beta]42 and Alzheimer's disease: relation to age, mortality, and risk}},
  journal = {Neurology},
  year    = {2003},
  doi     = {10.1212/01.wnl.0000091890.32140.8f},
  pmid    = {14610118},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000091890.32140.8f}
}

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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 48/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 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 1 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomized / 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; Multicenter collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 28 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 48 of 100. Total 48 of 100.28 of the 58 points we could judge = 48 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology)
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 1 / 5 2003 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 2 / 4 530 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)
Randomized / blinded 0 / 2 No randomization 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
Multicenter collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 14610118)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 28 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 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.

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

Related studies in Risk genes beyond APOE

Also tagged “age”

3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “age”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Risk genes beyond APOE

See all studies in Risk genes beyond APOE →