Home › Research › Biomarkers
Upward drift in cerebrospinal fluid amyloid β 42 assay values for more than 10 years
Schindler SE, Sutphen CL, Teunissen C, McCue LM, Morris JC, Holtzman DM, Mulder SD, Scheltens P et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2017-07-12
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Introduction The best-established cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease are levels of amyloid β 42 (Aβ42), total tau (tau), and phosphorylated tau 181 (ptau). We examined whether a widely used commercial immunoassay for CSF Aβ42, tau, and ptau provided stable measurements for more than ∼10 years. Methods INNOTEST assay values for CSF Aβ42, tau, and ptau from Washington University in St. Louis and VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, were evaluated. Results Aβ42 values as measured by the INNOTEST assay drifted upward by approximately 3% per year over the past decade. Tau values remained relatively stable, whereas results for ptau were mixed. Discussion Assay drift may reduce statistical power or even confound analyses. The drift in INNOTEST Aβ42 values may reduce diagnostic accuracy for Alzheimer's disease in the clinic. We recommend methods to account for assay drift in existing data sets and to reduce assay drift in future studies.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Schindler, S. E., Sutphen, C. L., Teunissen, C., McCue, L. M., Morris, J. C., Holtzman, D. M., et al. (2018). Upward drift in cerebrospinal fluid amyloid β 42 assay values for more than 10 years. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.2264
Vancouver
Schindler SE, Sutphen CL, Teunissen C, McCue LM, Morris JC, Holtzman DM, et al. Upward drift in cerebrospinal fluid amyloid β 42 assay values for more than 10 years. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.2264. PMID: 28710906.
BibTeX
@article{schindler2018-28710906,
author = {Schindler, S. E. and Sutphen, C. L. and Teunissen, C. and McCue, L. M. and Morris, J. C. and Holtzman, D. M. and Mulder, S. D. and Scheltens, P. and others},
title = {{Upward drift in cerebrospinal fluid amyloid β 42 assay values for more than 10 years}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2018},
doi = {10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.2264},
pmid = {28710906},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2017.06.2264}
}
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 Aβ42 values as measured by the INNOTEST assay drifted upward by approximately 3% per year over the past decade.
- Tau values remained relatively stable, whereas results for ptau were mixed.
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 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 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| 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 | 2018 — 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 28710906) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “value”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “value”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.