Home › Research › Tau biomarkers
Using cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers to diagnose Alzheimer's disease: an Australian perspective
Dhamidhu Eratne, Steven Collins, Peter J Nestor, Dimity Pond, Dennis Velakoulis, Mark Yates, Colin L Masters. Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024-12-05
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers are currently the only clinically validated biofluid diagnostic test for Alzheimer's Disease (AD) available in Australia. Testing of CSF biomarkers via lumbar puncture (LP), including quantification of amyloid-β peptide, total tau protein, and phosphorylated tau, can give insight into underlying pathophysiological changes and provide greater certainty in confirming or excluding the presence of Alzheimer's disease changes compared to standard clinical and radiological assessments. Despite CSF analysis being a safe and cost-effective diagnostic method, the use of CSF biomarkers in the evaluation of potential AD remains limited in Australian clinical practice due to a variety of factors, including regional access challenges, concerns over the perceived invasiveness of LP and a lack of confidence among clinicians in interpreting the results. The advent of disease-modifying therapies as a potential new treatment strategy to reduce the rate of progression in people with AD will drive the demand for early diagnosis of AD. This perspective argues for broader adoption of CSF biomarker testing by providing evidence-based, clinically informed expert guidance on when and why to consider CSF biomarker testing.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Eratne, D., Collins, S., Nestor, P. J., Pond, D., Velakoulis, D., Yates, M., et al. (2024). Using cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers to diagnose Alzheimer's disease: an Australian perspective. Frontiers in psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1488494
Vancouver
Eratne D, Collins S, Nestor PJ, Pond D, Velakoulis D, Yates M, et al. Using cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers to diagnose Alzheimer's disease: an Australian perspective. Frontiers in psychiatry. 2024. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1488494. PMID: 39703457.
BibTeX
@article{eratne2024-39703457,
author = {Eratne, Dhamidhu and Collins, Steven and Nestor, Peter J and Pond, Dimity and Velakoulis, Dennis and Yates, Mark and Masters, Colin L},
title = {{Using cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers to diagnose Alzheimer's disease: an Australian perspective}},
journal = {Frontiers in psychiatry},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1488494},
pmid = {39703457},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1488494}
}
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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Testing of CSF biomarkers via lumbar puncture (LP), including quantification of amyloid-β peptide, total tau protein, and phosphorylated tau, can give insight into underlying pathophysiological changes and provide greater certainty in confirming or excluding the presence of Alzheimer's disease changes compared to standard clinical and radiological assessments.
- Despite CSF analysis being a safe and cost-effective diagnostic method, the use of CSF biomarkers in the evaluation of potential AD remains limited in Australian clinical practice due to a variety of factors, including regional access challenges, concerns over the perceived invasiveness of LP and a lack of confidence among clinicians in interpreting the results.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in psychiatry) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 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) |
| 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 39703457) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 24 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 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 Tau biomarkers
Also tagged “p-tau217”
692 studies in the library carry the topic tag “p-tau217”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 692 tagged studies.