Cited by 368Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus

Accuracy of Brain Amyloid Detection in Clinical Practice Using Cerebrospinal Fluid β-Amyloid 42: A Cross-Validation Study Against Amyloid Positron Emission Tomography

Palmqvist, Sebastian, Zetterberg, Henrik, Blennow, Kaj, Vestberg, Susanna, Andreasson, Ulf, Brooks, David J., Owenius, Rikard, Hägerström, Douglas +3 more·2014·JAMA Neurology

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Before adding cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers to the diagnostic workup of Alzheimer disease, it needs to be determined whether CSF biomarkers analyzed in routine clinical practice can reliably predict cortical β-amyloid (Aβ) deposition. OBJECTIVES: To study whether CSF biomarkers, analyzed consecutively in routine clinical practice during 2 years, can predict cortical Aβ deposition and to establish a threshold for Aβ42 abnormality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study (The Swedish BioFINDER [Biomarkers For Identifying Neurodegenerative Disorders Early and Reliably] Study) was conducted at 3 memory clinics. It involved consecutively referred, nondemented patients with mild cognitive symptoms (original cohort, n = 118; validation cohort, n = 38). EXPOSURES: Amyloid positron emission tomography imaging with 18F-flutemetamol. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Analyses of CSF Aβ42, total tau, and phosphorylated tau using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (INNOTEST) in clinical samples. RESULTS: The agreement between Aβ classification with CSF Aβ42 and 18F-flutemetamol positron emission tomography was very high (κ = 0.85). Of all the cases, 92% were classified identically using an Aβ42 cutoff of 647 pg/mL or less. Cerebrospinal fluid Aβ42 predicted abnormal cortical Aβ deposition accurately (odds ratio, 165; 95% CI, 39-693; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.88-0.97). The association was independent of age, sex, APOE (apolipoprotein E) genotype, hippocampal volume, memory, and global cognition (adjusted odds ratio, 169; 95% CI, 25-1143). Using ratios of CSF Aβ42:tau or Aβ42:phosphorylated tau did not improve the prediction of Aβ deposition. Cerebrospinal fluid Aβ42 correlated significantly with Aβ deposition in all cortical regions. The highest correlations were in regions with high 18F-flutemetamol retention (eg, posterior cingulum and precuneus, r = -0.72). 18F-flutemetamol retention, but not CSF Aβ42, correlated significantly with global cognition (r = -0.32), memory function (r = -0.28), and hippocampal volume (r = -0.36) among those with abnormal Aβ deposition. Finally, the CSF Aβ42 cutoff derived from the original cohort (≤647 pg/mL) had an equally high agreement (95%; κ = 0.89) with 18F-flutemetamol positron emission tomography in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Cerebrospinal fluid Aβ42 analyzed consecutively in routine clinical practice at an accredited laboratory can be used with high accuracy to determine whether a patient has normal or increased cortical Aβ deposition and so can be valuable for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. Abnormal 18F-flutemetamol retention levels correlate with disease stage in patients with mild cognitive symptoms, but this is not the case for CSF Aβ42 measurements.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.1358

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palmqvist, S., Zetterberg, H., Blennow, K., Vestberg, S., Andreasson, U., Brooks, D. J., Owenius, R., Hägerström, D., Wollmer, P., Minthon, L., & Hansson, O.
Affiliations
  • Lund University (SE)
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
  • Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg and Mölndal, Sweden
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • GE Healthcare, Life Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
  • Skåne University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Hansson, Oskar
Venue
JAMA Neurology
Published
2014-10-01
Volume
71
Issue
10
Pages
1282
ISSN
2168-6149 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1992165389
Cited by
368
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 3
FWCI
27.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, amyloid-beta 42, cortical amyloid deposition, 18F-flutemetamol PET, total tau, phosphorylated tau, diagnostic accuracy, mild cognitive impairment, APOE genotype, hippocampal volume, memory clinics, early detection of neurodegeneration
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Aniline Compounds, Brain, Cerebral Cortex, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Peptide Fragments, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Amyloid beta-Peptides, Radiopharmaceuticals, Early Diagnosis, Positron-Emission Tomography, Benzothiazoles, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review