4.7 Article

Neurofilaments in blood and CSF for diagnosis and prediction of onset in Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 6, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/srep38737

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Germany, Competence Net Neurodegenerative Dementias [FTLDc 01GI1007A]
  2. EU [01ED1203F, 01ED1202A, 01ED1512]
  3. European Union (NADINE EU-FP7) [246513]
  4. European Union (Anteprion EU-FP6) [ORPHA257930]
  5. VINNOVA
  6. Swedish Research Council
  7. European Research Council [681712]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

While cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) are established and partly included in the diagnostic criteria, no blood biomarkers are available. Here, we assessed the utility of serum neurofilament light chain (NF-L) and tau protein in comparison to CSF markers (NF-L and phosphorylated NF heavy chain (pNF-H), tau, S100B, 14-3-3) and prion conversion assay (realtime quaking induced conversion (RT-QuIC)) for sporadic and genetic CJD. Importantly, a Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker mutation carrier in the asymptomatic phase and at disease onset was included as well. Both NF-L and tau were markedly increased in CJD serum, reaching similar or even better performance as in CSF (sensitivity and specificity for serum NF-L 100% and 85.5%, and for serum tau 84.6% and 96.2%, respectively). Serum S100B showed high sensitivity as well (84.2%), but lower specificity (63%). CSF neurofilaments were increased before symptom onset, while prion seeding assay was negative. Just before a clinical diagnosis could be made, all CSF markers and NF-L in the serum were increased and CSF prion conversion assay was positive. The data suggest that neurofilaments are sensitive and specific blood markers for the diagnosis of genetic and sporadic CJD and might represent promising tools to predict disease onset.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available