4.5 Article

Plasma Amyloid-beta as a Biomarker in Alzheimer's Disease: The AIBL Study of Aging

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALZHEIMERS DISEASE
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 1233-1242

出版社

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-2010-090249

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; amyloid-beta; biomarkers; diagnosis; Pittsburgh Compound B; positron-emission topography

资金

  1. CSIRO
  2. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) via the Dementia Collaborative Research Centres
  3. Pfizer International
  4. McCusker Foundation
  5. Edith Cowan University
  6. Alzheimer's Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Amyloid-beta (A beta) plays a central role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and has been postulated as a potential biomarker for AD. However, there is a lack of consensus as to its suitability as an AD biomarker. The objective of this study was to determine the significance of plasma A beta as an AD biomarker and its relationship with A beta load and to determine the effect of different assay methods on the interpretation of A beta levels. Plasma A beta(1-40), A beta(1-42), and N-terminal cleaved fragments were measured using both a commercial multiplex assay and a well-documented ELISA in 1032 individuals drawn from the well-characterized Australian Imaging, Biomarkers and Lifestyle (AIBL) study of aging. Further, A beta levels were compared to A beta load derived from positron-emission tomography (PET) with the Pittsburgh compound B (PiB). Lower A beta(1-42) and A beta(1-42/1-40) ratio were observed in patients with AD and inversely correlated with PiB-PET derived A beta load. However, assay methodology significantly impacted the interpretation of data. The cross-sectional analysis of plasma A beta isoforms suggests that they may not be sufficient per se to diagnose AD. The value of their measurement in prognosis and monitoring of AD interventions needs further study, in addition to future longitudinal comparisons together with other predictors, which will determine whether plasma A beta has diagnostic value in a panel of biomarkers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据