Home › Research › Biomarkers
Preliminary Study of Plasma Exosomal Tau as a Potential Biomarker for Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy
Stern RA, Tripodis Y, Baugh CM, Fritts NG, Martin BM, Chaisson C, Cantu RC, Joyce JA et al.. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2016-01-01
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Background Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a tauopathy associated with prior exposure to repetitive head impacts, such as those incurred through American football and other collision sports. Diagnosis is made through neuropathological examination. Many of the clinical features of CTE are common in the general population, with and without a history of head impact exposure, making clinical diagnosis difficult. As is now common in the diagnosis of other neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease, there is a need for methods to diagnose CTE during life through objective biomarkers. Objective The aim of this study was to examine tau-positive exosomes in plasma as a potential CTE biomarker. Methods Subjects were 78 former National Football League (NFL) players and 16 controls. Extracellular vesicles were isolated from plasma. Fluorescent nanoparticle tracking analysis was used to determine the number of vesicles staining positive for tau. Results The NFL group had higher exosomal tau than the control group (p < 0.0001). Exosomal tau discriminated between the groups, with 82% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value, and 53% negative predictive value. Within the NFL group, higher exosomal tau was associated with worse performance on tests of memory (p = 0.0126) and psychomotor speed (p = 0.0093). Conclusion These preliminary findings suggest that exosomal tau in plasma may be an accurate, noninvasive CTE biomarker.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Stern, R. A., Tripodis, Y., Baugh, C. M., Fritts, N. G., Martin, B. M., Chaisson, C., et al. (2016). Preliminary Study of Plasma Exosomal Tau as a Potential Biomarker for Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-151028
Vancouver
Stern RA, Tripodis Y, Baugh CM, Fritts NG, Martin BM, Chaisson C, et al. Preliminary Study of Plasma Exosomal Tau as a Potential Biomarker for Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2016. doi:10.3233/jad-151028. PMID: 26890775.
BibTeX
@article{stern2016-26890775,
author = {Stern, R. A. and Tripodis, Y. and Baugh, C. M. and Fritts, N. G. and Martin, B. M. and Chaisson, C. and Cantu, R. C. and Joyce, J. A. and others},
title = {{Preliminary Study of Plasma Exosomal Tau as a Potential Biomarker for Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy}},
journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.3233/jad-151028},
pmid = {26890775},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-151028}
}
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
- Background Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a tauopathy associated with prior exposure to repetitive head impacts, such as those incurred through American football and other collision sports.
- Results The NFL group had higher exosomal tau than the control group (p < 0.0001).
- Within the NFL group, higher exosomal tau was associated with worse performance on tests of memory (p = 0.0126) and psychomotor speed (p = 0.0093).
- Conclusion These preliminary findings suggest that exosomal tau in plasma may be an accurate, noninvasive CTE biomarker.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 2016 — within 20 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 26890775) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.