4.7 Article

CSF biomarker changes precede symptom onset of mild cognitive impairment

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 81, 期 20, 页码 1753-1758

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000435558.98447.17

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [U01-AG03365, P50-AG005146]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: This study evaluated longitudinal CSF biomarker measures collected when participants were cognitively normal to determine the magnitude and time course of biomarker changes before the onset of clinical symptoms in subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods: Longitudinal CSF collection and cognitive assessments were performed on a cohort of 265 participants who were cognitively normal at their baseline assessment and subsequently developed MCI or dementia. CSF beta-amyloid 1-42 (A beta 1-42), total tau (t-tau), and phosphorylated tau (p-tau) were determined longitudinally. Consensus diagnoses were completed annually. Cox regression analyses were performed, with baseline CSF values and time-dependent rate of change in CSF values as covariates (adjusted by baseline age, race, and education), in relation to time to onset of mild cognitive symptoms. Results: The mean time from baseline to onset of mild cognitive symptoms was 5.41 years. Increased risk of progressing from normal cognition to onset of clinical symptoms was associated with baseline values of A beta 1-42, p-tau, and the ratios of p-tau/A beta 1-42 and t-tau/A beta 1-42 (p < 0.002). Additionally, the rate of change in the ratios of t-tau/A beta 1-42 (p < 0.004) and p-tau/A beta 1-42 (p < 0.02) was greater among participants who were subsequently diagnosed with MCI. Conclusions: Baseline differences in CSF values were predictive of clinical symptoms that were a harbinger of a diagnosis of MCI more than 5 years before symptom onset, and continue to show longitudinal changes as cognitive symptoms develop, demonstrating that baseline and longitudinal changes in CSF biomarkers are evident during the preclinical phase of Alzheimer disease.

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