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 53 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Objective To determine if plasma tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (p-tau181) distinguishes pathology-confirmed Alzheimer's disease (AD) from normal cognition (NC) adults, to test if p-tau181 predicts cognitive and functional decline, and to validate findings in an external cohort. Methods Thirty-one neuropathology-confirmed AD cases, participants with clinical diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment (MCI, N = 91) or AD dementia (N = 64), and NC (N = 241) had plasma collected at study entry. The clinical diagnosis groups had annual cognitive (Mini-Mental State Examination, MMSE) and functional (Clinical Dementia Rating Scale, CDR) measures. NC (N = 70), MCI (N = 75), and AD dementia (N = 50) cases from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) were used as a validation cohort. Plasma p-tau181 was measured using the Quanterix SiMoA HD-X platform. Results Plasma p-tau181 differentiated pathology-confirmed AD from NC with negative amyloid PET scans with an AUC of 0.93. A cut point of 3.44 pg/mL (maximum Youden Index) had a sensitivity of 0.77, specificity of 0.96. p-Tau181 values above the cut point were associated with the faster rate of decline in MMSE in AD dementia and MCI and a shorter time to a clinically significant functional decline in all groups. In a subset of MCI cases from ADNI, p-tau181 values above the cut point associated with faster rate of decline in MMSE, and a shorter time to a clinically significant functional decline and conversion to dementia. Interpretation Plasma p-tau181 differentiates AD pathology cases from NC with high accuracy. Higher levels of plasma p-tau181 are associated with faster cognitive and functional decline.

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

APA 7th

Tropea, T. F., Waligorska, T., Xie, S. X., Nasrallah, I. M., Cousins, K. A. Q., Trojanowski, J. Q., et al. (2023). Plasma phosphorylated tau181 predicts cognitive and functional decline. Annals of clinical and translational neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.51695

Vancouver

Tropea TF, Waligorska T, Xie SX, Nasrallah IM, Cousins KAQ, Trojanowski JQ, et al. Plasma phosphorylated tau181 predicts cognitive and functional decline. Annals of clinical and translational neurology. 2023. doi:10.1002/acn3.51695. PMID: 36518085.

BibTeX

@article{tropea2023-36518085,
  author  = {Tropea, T. F. and Waligorska, T. and Xie, S. X. and Nasrallah, I. M. and Cousins, K. A. Q. and Trojanowski, J. Q. and Grossman, M. and Irwin, D. J. and others},
  title   = {{Plasma phosphorylated tau181 predicts cognitive and functional decline}},
  journal = {Annals of clinical and translational neurology},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.1002/acn3.51695},
  pmid    = {36518085},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.51695}
}

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 53/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 1 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 2 of 2. 31 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 53 of 100. Total 53 of 100.31 of the 58 points we could judge = 53 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 31 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 53 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Annals of clinical and translational 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 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 1 / 4 91 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 36518085)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 31 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 53 out of 100.
Total 53 / 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 Biomarkers

Also in Biomarkers

204 studies in the library are filed under Biomarkers with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Biomarkers hub.

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →