期刊
FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -出版社
FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.894119
关键词
agreement; beta coefficient; biomarker; neurofilament; SiMoA; Z-score standardization
资金
- German Research Society (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG) [BE1996/1-1]
- German Ministry of Research and Education (BMBF) [01ER0816, 01ER1506]
- Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine
- Department of Neurology, University of Muenster
- Swiss National Science Foundation [320030_189140/1]
This study investigated whether the choice of biological matrix can affect the results when using NfL as a biomarker. The study found that although there are differences between serum and EDTA-plasma NfL, the results can be used interchangeably if standardized values are used.
Introduction: Neurofilament light (NfL) can be detected in blood of healthy individuals and at elevated levels in those with different neurological diseases. We investigated if the choice of biological matrix can affect results when using NfL as biomarker in epidemiological studies. Method: We obtained paired serum and EDTA-plasma samples of 299 individuals aged 37-67 years (BiDirect study) and serum samples of 373 individuals aged 65-83 years (MEMO study). In BiDirect, Passing-Bablok analyses were performed to assess proportional and systematic differences between biological matrices. Associations between serum or EDTA-plasma NfL and renal function (serum creatinine, serum cystatin C, glomerular filtration rate, and kidney disease) were investigated using linear or logistic regression, respectively. All regression coefficients were estimated (1) per one ng/L increase and (2) per one standard deviation increase (standardization using z-scores). In MEMO, regression coefficients were estimated (1) per one ng/L increase of serum or calculated EDTA-plasma NfL and (2) per one standard deviation increase providing a comparison to the results from BiDirect. Results: We found proportional and systematic differences between paired NfL measurements in BiDirect, i.e., serum NfL [ng/L] = -0.33 [ng/L] + 1.11 x EDTA-plasma NfL [ng/L]. Linear regression coefficients for the associations between NfL and renal function did not vary between the different NfL measurements. In MEMO, one standard deviation increase in serum NfL was associated with greater changes in the outcomes than in BiDirect. Conclusion: Although there are differences between serum and EDTA-plasma NfL, results can be used interchangeably if standardized values are used.
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。
推荐
暂无数据