Home › Research › Biomarkers
Towards a unified protocol for handling of CSF before β-amyloid measurements
Janelidze S, Stomrud E, Brix B, Hansson O.. Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2019-07-19
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Background Widespread implementation of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in routine clinical practice requires the establishment of standard operating procedures for pre-analytical handling of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Methods Here, CSF collection and storage protocols were optimized for measurements of β-amyloid (Aβ). We investigated the effects of (1) storage temperature, (2) storage time, (3) centrifugation, (4) sample mixing, (5) blood contamination, and (6) collection gradient on CSF levels of Aβ. For each study participant, we used fresh CSF directly collected into a protein low binding (LoB) tube that was analyzed within hours after lumbar puncture (LP) as standard of truth. Aβ42 and Aβ40 were measured in de-identified CSF samples using EUROIMMUN and Mesoscale discovery assays. Results CSF Aβ42 and Aβ40 were stable for at least 72 h at room temperature (RT), 1 week at 4 °C, and 2 weeks at - 20 °C and - 80 °C. Centrifugation of non-blood-contaminated CSF or mixing of samples before the analysis did not affect Aβ levels. Addition of 0.1-10% blood to CSF that was stored at RT without centrifugation led to a dose- and time-dependent decrease in Aβ42 and Aβ40, while Aβ42/Aβ40 did not change. The effects of blood contamination were mitigated by centrifugation and/or storage at 4 °C or - 20 °C. Aβ levels did not differ between the first to fourth 5-ml portions of CSF. Conclusions CSF can be stored for up to 72 h at RT, 1 week at 4 °C, or at least 2 weeks at either - 20 °C or - 80 °C before Aβ measurements. Centrifugation of fresh non-blood-contaminated CSF after LP, or mixing before analysis, is not required. In case of visible blood contamination, centrifugation and storage at 4 °C or - 20 °C is recommended. After discarding the first 2 ml, any portion of up to 20 ml of CSF is suitable for Aβ analysis. These findings will be important for the development of a clinical routine protocol for pre-analytical handling of CSF.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Janelidze, S., Stomrud, E., Brix, B., & Hansson, O. (2019). Towards a unified protocol for handling of CSF before β-amyloid measurements. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-019-0517-9
Vancouver
Janelidze S, Stomrud E, Brix B, Hansson O. Towards a unified protocol for handling of CSF before β-amyloid measurements. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2019. doi:10.1186/s13195-019-0517-9. PMID: 31324260.
BibTeX
@article{janelidze2019-31324260,
author = {Janelidze, S. and Stomrud, E. and Brix, B. and Hansson, O.},
title = {{Towards a unified protocol for handling of CSF before β-amyloid measurements}},
journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1186/s13195-019-0517-9},
pmid = {31324260},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-019-0517-9}
}
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
- Results CSF Aβ42 and Aβ40 were stable for at least 72 h at room temperature (RT), 1 week at 4 °C, and 2 weeks at - 20 °C and - 80 °C.
- These findings will be important for the development of a clinical routine protocol for pre-analytical handling of CSF.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
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 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer's research & therapy) |
| 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 | 2019 — within 10 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 31324260) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 24 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 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 tagged “measurement”
5 studies in the library carry the topic tag “measurement”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 5 tagged studies.