Erratum: Development, appraisal, validation and implementation of a consensus protocol for the assessment of cerebral amyloid angiopathy in post-mortem brain tissue.

American journal of neurodegenerative disease Pub Date : 2015-12-28 eCollection Date: 2015-01-01
Seth Love, Katy Chalmers, Paul Ince, Margaret Esiri, Johannes Attems, Raj Kalaria, Kurt Jellinger, Masahito Yamada, Mark McCarron, Thais Minett, Fiona Matthews, Steven Greenberg, David Mann, Patrick Gavin Kehoe
{"title":"Erratum: Development, appraisal, validation and implementation of a consensus protocol for the assessment of cerebral amyloid angiopathy in post-mortem brain tissue.","authors":"Seth Love, Katy Chalmers, Paul Ince, Margaret Esiri, Johannes Attems, Raj Kalaria, Kurt Jellinger, Masahito Yamada, Mark McCarron, Thais Minett, Fiona Matthews, Steven Greenberg, David Mann, Patrick Gavin Kehoe","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a collaboration involving 11 groups with research interests in cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), we used a two-stage process to develop and in turn validate a new consensus protocol and scoring scheme for the assessment of CAA and associated vasculopathic abnormalities in post-mortem brain tissue. Stage one used an iterative Delphi-style survey to develop the consensus protocol. The resultant scoring scheme was tested on a series of digital images and paraffin sections that were circulated blind to a number of scorers. The scoring scheme and choice of staining methods were refined by open-forum discussion. The agreed protocol scored parenchymal and meningeal CAA on a 0-3 scale, capillary CAA as present/absent and vasculopathy on 0-2 scale, in the 4 cortical lobes that were scored separately. A further assessment involving three centres was then undertaken. Neuropathologists in three centres (Bristol, Oxford and Sheffield) independently scored sections from 75 cases (25 from each centre) and high inter-rater reliability was demonstrated. Stage two used the results of the three-centre assessment to validate the protocol by investigating previously described associations between APOE genotype (previously determined), and both CAA and vasculopathy. Association of capillary CAA with or without arteriolar CAA with APOE ε4 was confirmed. However APOE ε2 was also found to be a strong risk factor for the development of CAA, not only in AD but also in elderly non-demented controls. Further validation of this protocol and scoring scheme is encouraged, to aid its wider adoption to facilitate collaborative and replication studies of CAA.[This corrects the article on p. 19 in vol. 3, PMID: 24754000.]. </p>","PeriodicalId":72170,"journal":{"name":"American journal of neurodegenerative disease","volume":"4 2","pages":"49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4700126/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of neurodegenerative disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a collaboration involving 11 groups with research interests in cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), we used a two-stage process to develop and in turn validate a new consensus protocol and scoring scheme for the assessment of CAA and associated vasculopathic abnormalities in post-mortem brain tissue. Stage one used an iterative Delphi-style survey to develop the consensus protocol. The resultant scoring scheme was tested on a series of digital images and paraffin sections that were circulated blind to a number of scorers. The scoring scheme and choice of staining methods were refined by open-forum discussion. The agreed protocol scored parenchymal and meningeal CAA on a 0-3 scale, capillary CAA as present/absent and vasculopathy on 0-2 scale, in the 4 cortical lobes that were scored separately. A further assessment involving three centres was then undertaken. Neuropathologists in three centres (Bristol, Oxford and Sheffield) independently scored sections from 75 cases (25 from each centre) and high inter-rater reliability was demonstrated. Stage two used the results of the three-centre assessment to validate the protocol by investigating previously described associations between APOE genotype (previously determined), and both CAA and vasculopathy. Association of capillary CAA with or without arteriolar CAA with APOE ε4 was confirmed. However APOE ε2 was also found to be a strong risk factor for the development of CAA, not only in AD but also in elderly non-demented controls. Further validation of this protocol and scoring scheme is encouraged, to aid its wider adoption to facilitate collaborative and replication studies of CAA.[This corrects the article on p. 19 in vol. 3, PMID: 24754000.].

勘误:制定、评估、验证和实施一项共识协议,以评估死后脑组织中的脑淀粉样血管病。
在一项涉及11个具有脑淀粉样血管病(CAA)研究兴趣的小组的合作中,我们采用了两个阶段的过程来开发并反过来验证一个新的共识协议和评分方案,用于评估死后脑组织中CAA和相关血管病变异常。第一阶段使用迭代的delphi式调查来开发共识协议。所得到的评分方案在一系列数字图像和石蜡切片上进行了测试,这些图像和石蜡切片在一些评分者之间盲传。通过公开论坛讨论完善评分方案和染色方法的选择。在分别评分的4个皮质叶中,商定的方案对实质和脑膜CAA进行0-3级评分,对毛细血管CAA进行存在/不存在评分,对血管病变进行0-2级评分。随后又对三个中心进行了进一步评估。三个中心(布里斯托尔、牛津和谢菲尔德)的神经病理学家独立地对75个病例(每个中心25个)的切片进行评分,并证明了高评分者之间的可靠性。第二阶段使用三中心评估的结果,通过调查先前描述的APOE基因型(先前确定的)与CAA和血管病变之间的关联来验证方案。证实了APOE ε4与毛细血管CAA合并或不合并的关系。然而,APOE ε2也被发现是CAA发展的一个强大的危险因素,不仅在AD中,而且在老年非痴呆对照中也是如此。鼓励进一步验证该协议和评分方案,以帮助其更广泛地采用,以促进CAA的合作和复制研究。[这是对第3卷第19页的文章的更正,PMID: 24754000]。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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