Home › Research › Biomarkers
Renal function is associated with blood neurofilament light chain level in older adults
Akamine S, Marutani N, Kanayama D, Gotoh S, Maruyama R, Yanagida K, Sakagami Y, Mori K et al.. Scientific reports, 2020-11-23
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Neurofilament light chain (NfL) is a novel biomarker of neurodegenerative diseases. It is detectable in the peripheral blood, allowing low-invasive assessment of early signs of neurodegeneration. The level of NfL gradually increases with age; however, what other factors affect it remains unclear. The present study examined the association between blood NfL level and renal function among healthy participants undergoing a health check (n = 43, serum NfL) and patients with diabetes mellitus (n = 188, plasma NfL). All participants were 60 years of age or older; none were diagnosed with dementia. In each group, levels of blood NfL and serum creatinine significantly correlated (coefficient r = 0.50, 0.56). These associations remained statistically significant even after adjustment for age, sex, and body mass index. These findings indicate that blood NfL level might be partially affected by renal function. We recommend measuring renal function for a more precise evaluation of neuroaxonal damage, in particular, among older adults.
Key findings
- In each group, levels of blood NfL and serum creatinine significantly correlated (coefficient r = 0.50, 0.56).
- These associations remained statistically significant even after adjustment for age, sex, and body mass index.
- These findings indicate that blood NfL level might be partially affected by renal function.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants43
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
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 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Scientific reports) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 43 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 33230211) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Akamine, S., Marutani, N., Kanayama, D., Gotoh, S., Maruyama, R., Yanagida, K., et al. (2020). Renal function is associated with blood neurofilament light chain level in older adults. Scientific reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-76990-7
Vancouver
Akamine S, Marutani N, Kanayama D, Gotoh S, Maruyama R, Yanagida K, et al. Renal function is associated with blood neurofilament light chain level in older adults. Scientific reports. 2020. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-76990-7. PMID: 33230211.
BibTeX
@article{akamine2020-33230211,
author = {Akamine, S. and Marutani, N. and Kanayama, D. and Gotoh, S. and Maruyama, R. and Yanagida, K. and Sakagami, Y. and Mori, K. and others},
title = {{Renal function is associated with blood neurofilament light chain level in older adults}},
journal = {Scientific reports},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1038/s41598-020-76990-7},
pmid = {33230211},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-76990-7}
}
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “blood-based”
698 studies in the library carry the topic tag “blood-based”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 698 tagged studies.