4.7 Article

Cerebrospinal fluid markers for differential dementia diagnosis in a large memory clinic cohort

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 78, 期 1, 页码 47-54

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31823ed0f0

关键词

-

资金

  1. EU
  2. International Foundation for Alzheimer Research (ISAO)
  3. Lundbeck Inc.
  4. Alzheimer Nederland
  5. Alzheimer Center
  6. Stichting VUmc fonds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine how amyloid beta 42 (A beta 42), total tau (t-tau), and phosphorylated tau (p-tau) levels in CSF behave in a large cohort of patients with different types of dementia. Methods: Baseline CSF was collected from 512 patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) and 272 patients with other types of dementia (OD), 135 patients with a psychiatric disorder (PSY), and 275 patients with subjective memory complaints (SMC). A beta 42, t-tau, and p-tau (at amino acid 181) were measured in CSF by ELISA. Autopsy was obtained in a subgroup of 17 patients. Results: A correct classification of patients with AD (92%) and patients with OD (66%) was accomplished when CSF A beta 42 and p-tau were combined. Patients with progressive supranuclear palsy had normal CSF biomarker values in 90%. Patients with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease demonstrated an extremely high CSF t-tau at a relatively normal CSF p-tau. CSF AD biomarker profile was seen in 47% of patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), 38% in corticobasal degeneration (CBD), and almost 30% in frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and vascular dementia (VaD). PSY and SMC patients had normal CSF biomarkers in 91% and 88%. Older patients are more likely to have a CSF AD profile. Concordance between clinical and neuropathologic diagnosis was 85%. CSF markers reflected neuropathology in 94%. Conclusion: CSF A beta 42, t-tau, and p-tau are useful in differential dementia diagnosis. However, in DLB, FTLD, VaD, and CBD, a substantial group exhibit a CSF AD biomarker profile, which requires more autopsy confirmation in the future. Neurology (R) 2012;78:47-54

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

4.7
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