Home › Research › Biomarkers
Serum neurofilament light chain in genetic frontotemporal dementia: a longitudinal, multicentre cohort study
van der Ende EL, Meeter LH, Poos JM, Panman JL, Jiskoot LC, Dopper EGP, Papma JM, de Jong FJ et al.. The Lancet. Neurology, 2019-12-01
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Baseline NfL was elevated in symptomatic carriers (median 52 pg/mL [IQR 24-69]) compared with presymptomatic carriers (9 pg/mL [6-13]; p<0·0001) and non-carriers (8 pg/mL [6-11]; p<0·0001), and was higher in converters than in non-converting carriers (19 pg/mL [17-28] vs 8 pg/mL [6-11]; p=0·0007; adjusted for age). In symptomatic mutation carriers overall, NfL did not change during follow-up (b=0·017 [SE 0·010]; p=0·101) and remained elevated. Rates of NfL change over time were associated with rate of decline in Mini Mental State Examination (b=-94·7 [SE 33·9]; p=0·003) and atrophy rate in several grey matter regions, but not with change in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration-Clinical Dementia Rating scale score (b=-3·46 [SE 46·3]; p=0·941). Interpretation Our findings show the value of blood NfL as a disease progression biomarker in genetic frontotemporal dementia and suggest that longitudinal NfL measurements could identify mutation carriers approaching symptom onset and capture rates of brain atrophy.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
van der Ende, E. L., Meeter, L. H., Poos, J. M., Panman, J. L., Jiskoot, L. C., Dopper, E. G. P., et al. (2019). Serum neurofilament light chain in genetic frontotemporal dementia: a longitudinal, multicentre cohort study. The Lancet. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30354-0
Vancouver
van der Ende EL, Meeter LH, Poos JM, Panman JL, Jiskoot LC, Dopper EGP, et al. Serum neurofilament light chain in genetic frontotemporal dementia: a longitudinal, multicentre cohort study. The Lancet. Neurology. 2019. doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30354-0. PMID: 31701893.
BibTeX
@article{vanderende2019-31701893,
author = {van der Ende, E. L. and Meeter, L. H. and Poos, J. M. and Panman, J. L. and Jiskoot, L. C. and Dopper, E. G. P. and Papma, J. M. and de Jong, F. J. and others},
title = {{Serum neurofilament light chain in genetic frontotemporal dementia: a longitudinal, multicentre cohort study}},
journal = {The Lancet. Neurology},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30354-0},
pmid = {31701893},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(19)30354-0}
}
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
- Baseline NfL was elevated in symptomatic carriers (median 52 pg/mL [IQR 24-69]) compared with presymptomatic carriers (9 pg/mL [6-13]; p<0·0001) and non-carriers (8 pg/mL [6-11]; p<0·0001), and was higher in converters than in non-converting carriers (19 pg/mL [17-28] vs 8 pg/mL [6-11]; p=0·0007; adjusted for age).
- In symptomatic mutation carriers overall, NfL did not change during follow-up (b=0·017 [SE 0·010]; p=0·101) and remained elevated.
- Rates of NfL change over time were associated with rate of decline in Mini Mental State Examination (b=-94·7 [SE 33·9]; p=0·003) and atrophy rate in several grey matter regions, but not with change in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration-Clinical Dementia Rating scale score (b=-3·46 [SE 46·3]; p=0·941).
- Interpretation Our findings show the value of blood NfL as a disease progression biomarker in genetic frontotemporal dementia and suggest that longitudinal NfL measurements could identify mutation carriers approaching symptom onset and capture rates of brain atrophy.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Participants59
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for effect reported 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 and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 39 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Lancet. Neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 59 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) |
| 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 | 2 / 3 | PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31701893) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 39 / 61 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 39 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 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.
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also in Biomarkers
147 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.