Home › Research › Biomarkers
The global Alzheimer's Association round robin study on plasma amyloid β methods
Pannee J, Shaw LM, Korecka M, Waligorska T, Teunissen CE, Stoops E, Vanderstichele HMJ, Mauroo K et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2021-10-14
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Introduction Blood-based assays to measure brain amyloid beta (Aβ) deposition are an attractive alternative to the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)-based assays currently used in clinical settings. In this study, we examined different blood-based assays to measure Aβ and how they compare among centers and assays. Methods Aliquots from 81 plasma samples were distributed to 10 participating centers. Seven immunological assays and four mass-spectrometric methods were used to measure plasma Aβ concentrations. Results Correlations were weak for Aβ42 while Aβ40 correlations were stronger. The ratio Aβ42/Aβ40 did not improve the correlations and showed weak correlations. Discussion The poor correlations for Aβ42 in plasma might have several potential explanations, such as the high levels of plasma proteins (compared to CSF), sensitivity to pre-analytical sample handling and specificity, and cross-reactivity of different antibodies. Different methods might also measure different pools of plasma Aβ42. We, however, hypothesize that greater correlations might be seen in future studies because many of the methods have been refined during completion of this study.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Pannee, J., Shaw, L. M., Korecka, M., Waligorska, T., Teunissen, C. E., Stoops, E., et al. (2021). The global Alzheimer's Association round robin study on plasma amyloid β methods. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12242
Vancouver
Pannee J, Shaw LM, Korecka M, Waligorska T, Teunissen CE, Stoops E, et al. The global Alzheimer's Association round robin study on plasma amyloid β methods. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2021. doi:10.1002/dad2.12242. PMID: 34692980.
BibTeX
@article{pannee2021-34692980,
author = {Pannee, J. and Shaw, L. M. and Korecka, M. and Waligorska, T. and Teunissen, C. E. and Stoops, E. and Vanderstichele, H. M. J. and Mauroo, K. and others},
title = {{The global Alzheimer's Association round robin study on plasma amyloid β methods}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1002/dad2.12242},
pmid = {34692980},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12242}
}
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
- Results Correlations were weak for Aβ42 while Aβ40 correlations were stronger.
- Discussion The poor correlations for Aβ42 in plasma might have several potential explanations, such as the high levels of plasma proteins (compared to CSF), sensitivity to pre-analytical sample handling and specificity, and cross-reactivity of different antibodies.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a leading specialty 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 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)) |
| 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 | 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 34692980) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 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 Biomarkers
Also in Biomarkers
224 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.