Home › Research › Biomarkers
Spatial organization of protein aggregates on red blood cells as physical biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease pathology
Nirmalraj PN, Schneider T, Felbecker A.. Science advances, 2021-09-24
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Quantifying physical differences of protein aggregates implicated in Alzheimer’s disease (AD), in blood, could provide crucial information on disease stages. Here, red blood cells (RBCs) from 50 patients with neurocognitive complaints and 16 healthy individuals were profiled using an atomic force microscope (AFM). AFM measurements revealed patient age– and stage of neurocognitive disorder–dependent differences in size, shape, morphology, assembly, and prevalence of protein aggregates on RBCs, referred to as physical biomarkers. Crystals composed of fibrils were exclusively detected on RBCs for AD patients aged above 80 years. Fibril prevalence was negatively correlated with the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) β-amyloid (Aβ) 42/40 ratio and was observed to be higher in the Aβ-positive patient category. Using a cutoff of ≥40% fibril prevalence, the CSF Aβ status was classified with 88% accuracy (sensitivity 100%, specificity 73%). The merits and challenges in integrating physical biomarkers in AD diagnosis are discussed.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Nirmalraj, P. N., Schneider, T., & Felbecker, A. (2021). Spatial organization of protein aggregates on red blood cells as physical biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease pathology. Science advances. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abj2137
Vancouver
Nirmalraj PN, Schneider T, Felbecker A. Spatial organization of protein aggregates on red blood cells as physical biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease pathology. Science advances. 2021. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abj2137. PMID: 34559561.
BibTeX
@article{nirmalraj2021-34559561,
author = {Nirmalraj, P. N. and Schneider, T. and Felbecker, A.},
title = {{Spatial organization of protein aggregates on red blood cells as physical biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease pathology}},
journal = {Science advances},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1126/sciadv.abj2137},
pmid = {34559561},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abj2137}
}
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
- AFM measurements revealed patient age– and stage of neurocognitive disorder–dependent differences in size, shape, morphology, assembly, and prevalence of protein aggregates on RBCs, referred to as physical biomarkers.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants50
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 50/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 29 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 50 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Science advances) |
| 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 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 50 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 | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34559561) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 29 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 50 out of 100. |
| Total | 50 / 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.