| 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. |
- Mattsson, Niklas, 1979, et al.
(författare)
-
Selective vulnerability in neurodegeneration: insights from clinical variants of Alzheimer's disease.
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. - : BMJ. - 1468-330X .- 0022-3050. ; 87:9, s. 1000-1004
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Selective vulnerability in the nervous system refers to the fact that subpopulations of neurons in different brain systems may be more or less prone to abnormal function or death in response to specific types of pathological states or injury. The concept has been used extensively as a potential way of explaining differences in degeneration patterns and the clinical presentation of different neurodegenerative diseases. Yet the increasing complexity of molecular histopathology at the cellular level in neurodegenerative disorders frequently appears at odds with phenotyping based on clinically-directed, macroscopic regional brain involvement. While cross-disease comparisons can provide insights into the differential vulnerability of networks and neuronal populations, we focus here on what is known about selective vulnerability-related factors that might explain the differential phenotypic expressions of the same disease-in this case, typical and atypical forms of Alzheimer's disease. Whereas considerable progress has been made in this area, much is yet to be elucidated; further studies comparing different phenotypic variants aimed at identifying both vulnerability and resilience factors may provide valuable insights into disease pathogenesis, and suggest novel targets for therapy.
|
|
