New approach to specific Alzheimer's disease diagnosis based on plasma biomarkers in a cognitive disorder cohort.

IF 4.4 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Lourdes Álvarez-Sánchez, Laura Ferré-González, Carmen Peña-Bautista, Ángel Balaguer, Julián Luis Amengual, Miguel Baquero, Laura Cubas, Bonaventura Casanova, Consuelo Cháfer-Pericás
{"title":"New approach to specific Alzheimer's disease diagnosis based on plasma biomarkers in a cognitive disorder cohort.","authors":"Lourdes Álvarez-Sánchez, Laura Ferré-González, Carmen Peña-Bautista, Ángel Balaguer, Julián Luis Amengual, Miguel Baquero, Laura Cubas, Bonaventura Casanova, Consuelo Cháfer-Pericás","doi":"10.1111/eci.70034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The validation of a combination of plasma biomarkers and demographic variables is required to establish reliable cut-offs for Alzheimer's disease diagnosis (AD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Plasma biomarkers (Aβ42/Aβ40, p-Tau181, t-Tau, NfL, GFAP), ApoE genotype, and demographic variables were obtained from a retrospective clinical cohort of cognitive disorders (n = 478). These patients were diagnosed as AD (n = 254) or non-AD (n = 224) according to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42/Aβ40 levels. An analysis using a Ridge logistic regression model was performed to predict the occurrence of AD. The predictive performance of the model was assessed using the observations from a training set (70% of the sample) and validated using a test set (30% of the sample) in each group. Optimum cutoffs for the model were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The model including plasma Aβ42/Aβ40, p-Tau181, GFAP, ApoE genotype and age was optimal for predicting CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 positivity (AUC .91, sensitivity .86, specificity .82). The model including only plasma biomarkers (Aβ42/Aβ40, p-Tau181, GFAP) provided reliable results (AUC .88, sensitivity .83, specificity .78). Also, GFAP, individually, showed the best performance in discriminating between AD and non-AD groups (AUC .859). The established cut-offs in a three-range strategy performed satisfactorily for the validated predictive model (probability) and individual plasma GFAP (concentration).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The plasma GFAP levels and the validated predictive model based on plasma biomarkers represent a relevant step toward the development of a potential clinical approach for AD diagnosis, which should be assessed in further research.</p>","PeriodicalId":12013,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"e70034"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.70034","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The validation of a combination of plasma biomarkers and demographic variables is required to establish reliable cut-offs for Alzheimer's disease diagnosis (AD).

Methods: Plasma biomarkers (Aβ42/Aβ40, p-Tau181, t-Tau, NfL, GFAP), ApoE genotype, and demographic variables were obtained from a retrospective clinical cohort of cognitive disorders (n = 478). These patients were diagnosed as AD (n = 254) or non-AD (n = 224) according to cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42/Aβ40 levels. An analysis using a Ridge logistic regression model was performed to predict the occurrence of AD. The predictive performance of the model was assessed using the observations from a training set (70% of the sample) and validated using a test set (30% of the sample) in each group. Optimum cutoffs for the model were evaluated.

Results: The model including plasma Aβ42/Aβ40, p-Tau181, GFAP, ApoE genotype and age was optimal for predicting CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 positivity (AUC .91, sensitivity .86, specificity .82). The model including only plasma biomarkers (Aβ42/Aβ40, p-Tau181, GFAP) provided reliable results (AUC .88, sensitivity .83, specificity .78). Also, GFAP, individually, showed the best performance in discriminating between AD and non-AD groups (AUC .859). The established cut-offs in a three-range strategy performed satisfactorily for the validated predictive model (probability) and individual plasma GFAP (concentration).

Conclusions: The plasma GFAP levels and the validated predictive model based on plasma biomarkers represent a relevant step toward the development of a potential clinical approach for AD diagnosis, which should be assessed in further research.

认知障碍队列中基于血浆生物标志物的阿尔茨海默病特异性诊断新方法
背景:需要对血浆生物标志物和人口统计学变量的组合进行验证,以建立阿尔茨海默病诊断(AD)的可靠截止值。方法:从478例认知障碍患者的回顾性临床队列中获取血浆生物标志物(a - β42/ a - β40、p-Tau181、t-Tau、NfL、GFAP)、ApoE基因型和人口统计学变量。根据脑脊液Aβ42/Aβ40水平,诊断为AD(254例)或非AD(224例)。使用Ridge逻辑回归模型进行分析以预测AD的发生。模型的预测性能使用来自训练集(70%的样本)的观察结果进行评估,并使用每组中的测试集(30%的样本)进行验证。对模型的最佳截止值进行了评估。结果:血浆a - β42/ a - β40、p-Tau181、GFAP、ApoE基因型和年龄预测脑脊液a - β42/ a - β40阳性的模型最适合预测脑脊液a - β42/ a - β40阳性(AUC为0.91,敏感性为0.86,特异性为0.82)。该模型仅包含血浆生物标志物(a - β42/ a - β40, p-Tau181, GFAP)提供可靠的结果(AUC为0.88,灵敏度为0.83,特异性为0.78)。GFAP在区分AD组和非AD组方面表现最佳(AUC .859)。在三范围策略中建立的截止值对于验证的预测模型(概率)和个体血浆GFAP(浓度)表现令人满意。结论:血浆GFAP水平和基于血浆生物标志物的验证预测模型代表了开发潜在的阿尔茨海默病临床诊断方法的相关步骤,应在进一步的研究中进行评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
3.60%
发文量
192
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: EJCI considers any original contribution from the most sophisticated basic molecular sciences to applied clinical and translational research and evidence-based medicine across a broad range of subspecialties. The EJCI publishes reports of high-quality research that pertain to the genetic, molecular, cellular, or physiological basis of human biology and disease, as well as research that addresses prevalence, diagnosis, course, treatment, and prevention of disease. We are primarily interested in studies directly pertinent to humans, but submission of robust in vitro and animal work is also encouraged. Interdisciplinary work and research using innovative methods and combinations of laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological methodologies and techniques is of great interest to the journal. Several categories of manuscripts (for detailed description see below) are considered: editorials, original articles (also including randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses), reviews (narrative reviews), opinion articles (including debates, perspectives and commentaries); and letters to the Editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信