Home › Research › Tau biomarkers
Seed amplification assay for the detection of pathologic alpha-synuclein aggregates in cerebrospinal fluid
Concha-Marambio L, Pritzkow S, Shahnawaz M, Farris CM, Soto C.. Nature protocols, 2023-01-18
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Misfolded alpha-synuclein (αSyn) aggregates are a hallmark event in Parkinson's disease (PD) and other synucleinopathies. Recently, αSyn seed amplification assays (αSyn-SAAs) have shown promise as a test for biochemical diagnosis of synucleinopathies. αSyn-SAAs use the intrinsic self-replicative nature of misfolded αSyn aggregates (seeds) to multiply them in vitro. In these assays, αSyn seeds circulating in biological fluids are amplified by a cyclical process that includes aggregate fragmentation into smaller self-propagating seeds, followed by elongation at the expense of recombinant αSyn (rec-αSyn). Amplification of the seeds allows detection by fluorescent dyes specific for amyloids, such as thioflavin T. Several αSyn-SAA reports have been published in the past under the names 'protein misfolding cyclic amplification' (αSyn-PMCA) and 'real-time quaking-induced conversion'. Here, we describe a protocol for αSyn-SAA, originally reported as αSyn-PMCA, which allows detection of αSyn aggregates in cerebrospinal fluid samples from patients affected by PD, dementia with Lewy bodies or multiple-system atrophy (MSA). Moreover, this αSyn-SAA can differentiate αSyn aggregates from patients with PD versus those from patients with MSA, even in retrospective samples from patients with pure autonomic failure who later developed PD or MSA. We also describe modifications to the original protocol introduced to develop an optimized version of the assay. The optimized version shortens the assay length, decreases the amount of rec-αSyn required and reduces the number of inconclusive results. The protocol has a hands-on time of ~2 h per 96-well plate and can be performed by personnel trained to perform basic experiments with specimens of human origin.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Concha-Marambio, L., Pritzkow, S., Shahnawaz, M., Farris, C. M., & Soto, C. (2023). Seed amplification assay for the detection of pathologic alpha-synuclein aggregates in cerebrospinal fluid. Nature protocols. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-022-00787-3
Vancouver
Concha-Marambio L, Pritzkow S, Shahnawaz M, Farris CM, Soto C. Seed amplification assay for the detection of pathologic alpha-synuclein aggregates in cerebrospinal fluid. Nature protocols. 2023. doi:10.1038/s41596-022-00787-3. PMID: 36653527.
BibTeX
@article{conchamarambio2023-36653527,
author = {Concha-Marambio, L. and Pritzkow, S. and Shahnawaz, M. and Farris, C. M. and Soto, C.},
title = {{Seed amplification assay for the detection of pathologic alpha-synuclein aggregates in cerebrospinal fluid}},
journal = {Nature protocols},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1038/s41596-022-00787-3},
pmid = {36653527},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41596-022-00787-3}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Moreover, this αSyn-SAA can differentiate αSyn aggregates from patients with PD versus those from patients with MSA, even in retrospective samples from patients with pure autonomic failure who later developed PD or MSA.
- The optimized version shortens the assay length, decreases the amount of rec-αSyn required and reduces the number of inconclusive results.
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 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 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 (Nature protocols) |
| 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 | 2023 — 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) |
| 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 36653527) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| 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 Tau biomarkers
Also tagged “csf”
18 studies in the library carry the topic tag “csf”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 18 tagged studies.