Home › Research › Biomarkers
Vasomechanic treatment increases efflux of human brain proteins
Tuunanen J, Hautamäki K, Väyrynen T, Järvelä M, Korhonen V, Huotari N, Kaakinen M, Kananen J et al.. medRxiv, 2026-01-23
Topic: Inflammation, microglia and astrocytes
An age-related decline in vasodilation mediated by neurovascular nitric oxide (NO) and vasoconstriction driven by the Piezo1 receptor precede the aggregation of soluble brain proteins such as amyloid-β (Aβ), which then causes further disruption of brain solute homeostasis, ultimately leading to neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s disease. Preclinical studies show that restoring these vascular functions increases neurofluidic efflux and improves cognitive outcomes. Here, we tested effects of sublingual NO and/or Piezo1 receptor-targeted mechanotransductive whole-body vibrations (WBV p ) in healthy adults (n = 29) on brain fluid dynamics and CNS-to-blood protein efflux using multimodal neuroimaging and blood biomarker analysis. The combined vasomechanic interventions (NO+WBV p ) produced a synergistic enhancement of brain fluid transport and markedly increased the efflux of soluble brain-derived proteins (Aβ 40&42 , glial fibrillary acidic protein) into the bloodstream. The effects increase with age and the magnitude of NO-induced hypotension. Importantly, the combined intervention was well-tolerated, with no severe adverse physiological responses. Results demonstrate that a simple, non-invasive vasomechanic intervention can transiently promote brain-to-blood protein clearance in humans, highlighting a potentially safe and accessible therapeutic avenue for neurodegenerative conditions characterized by impaired brain solute removal and protein aggregation.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Tuunanen, J., Hautamäki, K., Väyrynen, T., Järvelä, M., Korhonen, V., Huotari, N., et al. (2026). Vasomechanic treatment increases efflux of human brain proteins. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.01.22.26344377
Vancouver
Tuunanen J, Hautamäki K, Väyrynen T, Järvelä M, Korhonen V, Huotari N, et al. Vasomechanic treatment increases efflux of human brain proteins. medRxiv. 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.01.22.26344377.
BibTeX
@article{tuunanen2026-63f1c5a1,
author = {Tuunanen, J. and Hautamäki, K. and Väyrynen, T. and Järvelä, M. and Korhonen, V. and Huotari, N. and Kaakinen, M. and Kananen, J. and others},
title = {{Vasomechanic treatment increases efflux of human brain proteins}},
journal = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.01.22.26344377},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.01.22.26344377}
}
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 demonstrate that a simple, non-invasive vasomechanic intervention can transiently promote brain-to-blood protein clearance in humans, highlighting a potentially safe and accessible therapeutic avenue for neurodegenerative conditions characterized by impaired brain solute removal and protein aggregation.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants29
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 27 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on 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 17 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 27 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| 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 | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 29 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 | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 17 / 62 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 17 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 27 out of 100. |
| Total | 27 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
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 “amyloid-angiopathy”
228 studies in the library carry the topic tag “amyloid-angiopathy”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 228 tagged studies.