| 1. |
- Bridel, Claire, et al.
(författare)
-
Diagnostic Value of Cerebrospinal Fluid Neurofilament Light Protein in Neurology : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
- 2019
-
Ingår i: JAMA Neurology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2168-6149 .- 2168-6157. ; 76:9, s. 1035-1048
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance Neurofilament light protein (NfL) is elevated in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of a number of neurological conditions compared with healthy controls (HC) and is a candidate biomarker for neuroaxonal damage. The influence of age and sex is largely unknown, and levels across neurological disorders have not been compared systematically to date.Objectives To assess the associations of age, sex, and diagnosis with NfL in CSF (cNfL) and to evaluate its potential in discriminating clinically similar conditions.Data Sources PubMed was searched for studies published between January 1, 2006, and January 1, 2016, reporting cNfL levels (using the search terms neurofilament light and cerebrospinal fluid) in neurological or psychiatric conditions and/or in HC.Study Selection Studies reporting NfL levels measured in lumbar CSF using a commercially available immunoassay, as well as age and sex.Data Extraction and Synthesis Individual-level data were requested from study authors. Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to estimate the fixed effects of age, sex, and diagnosis on log-transformed NfL levels, with cohort of origin modeled as a random intercept.Main Outcome and Measure The cNfL levels adjusted for age and sex across diagnoses.Results Data were collected for 10 059 individuals (mean [SD] age, 59.7 [18.8] years; 54.1% female). Thirty-five diagnoses were identified, including inflammatory diseases of the central nervous system (n = 2795), dementias and predementia stages (n = 4284), parkinsonian disorders (n = 984), and HC (n = 1332). The cNfL was elevated compared with HC in a majority of neurological conditions studied. Highest levels were observed in cognitively impaired HIV-positive individuals (iHIV), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, frontotemporal dementia (FTD), and Huntington disease. In 33.3% of diagnoses, including HC, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer disease (AD), and Parkinson disease (PD), cNfL was higher in men than women. The cNfL increased with age in HC and a majority of neurological conditions, although the association was strongest in HC. The cNfL overlapped in most clinically similar diagnoses except for FTD and iHIV, which segregated from other dementias, and PD, which segregated from atypical parkinsonian syndromes.Conclusions and Relevance These data support the use of cNfL as a biomarker of neuroaxonal damage and indicate that age-specific and sex-specific (and in some cases disease-specific) reference values may be needed. The cNfL has potential to assist the differentiation of FTD from AD and PD from atypical parkinsonian syndromes.
|
|
| 2. |
- Ehrenberg, Alexander J., et al.
(författare)
-
Relevance of biomarkers across different neurodegenerative
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Alzheimer's Research and Therapy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1758-9193. ; 12
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The panel of fluid- and imaging-based biomarkers available for neurodegenerative disease research is growing and has the potential to close important gaps in research and the clinic. With this growth and increasing use, appropriate implementation and interpretation are paramount. Various biomarkers feature nuanced differences in strengths, limitations, and biases that must be considered when investigating disease etiology and clinical utility. For example, neuropathological investigations of Alzheimer's disease pathogenesis can fall in disagreement with conclusions reached by biomarker-based investigations. Considering the varied strengths, limitations, and biases of different research methodologies and approaches may help harmonize disciplines within the neurodegenerative disease field. Purpose of review: Along with separate review articles covering fluid and imaging biomarkers in this issue of Alzheimer's Research and Therapy, we present the result of a discussion from the 2019 Biomarkers in Neurodegenerative Diseases course at the University College London. Here, we discuss themes of biomarker use in neurodegenerative disease research, commenting on appropriate use, interpretation, and considerations for implementation across different neurodegenerative diseases. We also draw attention to areas where biomarker use can be combined with other disciplines to understand issues of pathophysiology and etiology underlying dementia. Lastly, we highlight novel modalities that have been proposed in the landscape of neurodegenerative disease research and care.
|
|
| 3. |
- Obrocki, Pawel, et al.
(författare)
-
Perspectives in fluid biomarkers in neurodegeneration from the 2019 biomarkers in neurodegenerative diseases course - A joint PhD student course at University College London and University of Gothenburg
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Alzheimer's Research and Therapy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1758-9193. ; 12:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Until relatively recently, a diagnosis of probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other neurodegenerative disorders was principally based on clinical presentation, with post-mortem examination remaining a gold standard for disease confirmation. This is in sharp contrast to other areas of medicine, where fluid biomarkers, such as troponin levels in myocardial infarction, form an integral part of the diagnostic and treatment criteria. There is a pressing need for such quantifiable and easily accessible tools in neurodegenerative diseases. In this paper, based on lectures given at the 2019 Biomarkers in Neurodegenerative Diseases Course, we provide an overview of a range of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood biomarkers in neurodegenerative disorders, including the 'core' AD biomarkers amyloid β (Aβ) and tau, as well as other disease-specific and general markers of neuroaxonal injury. We then highlight the main challenges in the field, and how those could be overcome with the aid of new methodological advances, such as assay automation, mass spectrometry and ultrasensitive immunoassays. As we hopefully move towards an era of disease-modifying treatments, reliable biomarkers will be essential to increase diagnostic accuracy, allow for earlier diagnosis, better participant selection and disease activity and treatment effect monitoring.
|
|
