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.

43/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers

Plain-language summary

Background To assess the performance of plasma neurofilament light (NfL) and phosphorylated tau 181 (p-tau181) to inform about cerebral Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology and predict clinical progression in a memory clinic setting. Methods Plasma NfL and p-tau181, along with established cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers of AD pathology, were measured in participants with normal cognition (CN) and memory clinic patients with cognitive impairment (mild cognitive impairment and dementia, CI). Clinical and neuropsychological assessments were performed at inclusion and follow-up visits at 18 and 36 months. Multivariate analysis assessed associations of plasma NfL and p-tau181 levels with AD, single CSF biomarkers, hippocampal volume, and clinical measures of disease progression. Results Plasma NfL levels were higher in CN participants with an AD CSF profile (defined by a CSF p-tau181/Aβ 1-42 > 0.0779) as compared with CN non-AD, while p-tau181 plasma levels were higher in CI patients with AD. Plasma NfL levels correlated with CSF tau and p-tau181 in CN, and with CSF tau in CI patients. Plasma p-tau181 correlated with CSF p-tau181 in CN and with CSF tau, p-tau181, Aβ 1-42 , and Aβ 1-42 /Aβ 1-40 in CI participants. Compared with a reference model, adding plasma p-tau181 improved the prediction of AD in CI patients while adding NfL did not. Adding p-tau181, but not NfL levels, to a reference model improved prediction of cognitive decline in CI participants. Conclusion Plasma NfL indicates neurodegeneration while plasma p-tau181 levels can serve as a biomarker of cerebral AD pathology and cognitive decline. Their predictive performance depends on the presence of cognitive impairment.

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

APA 7th

Clark, C., Lewczuk, P., Kornhuber, J., Richiardi, J., Maréchal, B., Karikari, T. K., et al. (2021). Plasma neurofilament light and phosphorylated tau 181 as biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease pathology and clinical disease progression. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-021-00805-8

Vancouver

Clark C, Lewczuk P, Kornhuber J, Richiardi J, Maréchal B, Karikari TK, et al. Plasma neurofilament light and phosphorylated tau 181 as biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease pathology and clinical disease progression. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2021. doi:10.1186/s13195-021-00805-8. PMID: 33766131.

BibTeX

@article{clark2021-33766131,
  author  = {Clark, C. and Lewczuk, P. and Kornhuber, J. and Richiardi, J. and Maréchal, B. and Karikari, T. K. and Blennow, K. and Zetterberg, H. and others},
  title   = {{Plasma neurofilament light and phosphorylated tau 181 as biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease pathology and clinical disease progression}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.1186/s13195-021-00805-8},
  pmid    = {33766131},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-021-00805-8}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: our record does not state a study design, so check the methods section of the original before weighing the result.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Results Plasma NfL levels were higher in CN participants with an AD CSF profile (defined by a CSF p-tau181/Aβ 1-42 > 0.0779) as compared with CN non-AD, while p-tau181 plasma levels were higher in CI patients with AD.
Compared with a reference model, adding plasma p-tau181 improved the prediction of AD in CI patients while adding NfL did not.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 43/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer's research & therapy)
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	2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 33766131)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	25 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total	43 / 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 from nearby years

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 →