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 61 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers

White matter hyperintensities (WMH) is mainly caused by cerebrovascular injury and may also increase the possibilities of progression to Alzheimer's disease. The present study aims to determine whether plasma neurofilament light (NFL) protein levels could predict the progression of WMH volume in elderly persons without dementia. The present study enrolled 1029 non-dementia participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative in which all had measurements of plasma NFL and WMH at baseline and 589 had longitudinal measurements during follow-up. Spearman correlation analyses and regression models were used to assess cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between plasma NFL and WMH. Plasma NFL concentration had a moderately strong correlation with WMH at baseline (r = 0.17, p < 0.001). Longitudinal analyses showed that higher baseline plasma NFL concentration was associated with accelerated progression of WMH (β=0.015, p = 0.007). Furthermore, higher change rates of plasma NFL could predict faster progression of WMH in the future (β=0.581, p = 0.002). The results of the study suggest that plasma NFL level might be used as a noninvasive biomarker to track variation trend in WMH in elderly persons without dementia.

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

APA 7th

Sun, Y., Tan, L., Xu, W., Wang, Z.-T., Hu, H., Li, J.-Q., et al. (2020). Plasma Neurofilament Light and Longitudinal Progression of White Matter Hyperintensity in Elderly Persons Without Dementia. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-200022

Vancouver

Sun Y, Tan L, Xu W, Wang Z.-T, Hu H, Li J.-Q, et al. Plasma Neurofilament Light and Longitudinal Progression of White Matter Hyperintensity in Elderly Persons Without Dementia. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2020. doi:10.3233/jad-200022. PMID: 32310173.

BibTeX

@article{sun2020-32310173,
  author  = {Sun, Yan and Tan, Lin and Xu, Wei and Wang, Zuo-Teng and Hu, Hao and Li, Jie-Qiong and Dong, Qiang and Tan, Lan and others},
  title   = {{Plasma Neurofilament Light and Longitudinal Progression of White Matter Hyperintensity in Elderly Persons Without Dementia}},
  journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
  year    = {2020},
  doi     = {10.3233/jad-200022},
  pmid    = {32310173},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-200022}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 61/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 4 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 3 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 left out, no data. 34 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 61 of 100. Total 61 of 100.34 of the 56 points we could judge = 61 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 61 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD)
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 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 2 / 5 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 1,029 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 32310173)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 34 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 61 out of 100.
Total 61 / 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

Also tagged “p-tau217”

692 studies in the library carry the topic tag “p-tau217”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 692 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →